THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD vs. AMBE TRADECORP PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS J.P. FINCORP SERVICES PVT. LTD.)

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/319/2022HC GujaratGJHC24036531202211 July 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that by an order of even date, passed in Tax Appeal No. 318 of 2022, the appeal filed by the Revenue on merits had been summarily dismissed. Consequently, the High Court held that the substantial question of law raised in the present appeal, concerning the reopening of assessment, was not required to be answered as it would be an academic exercise. Therefore, the appeal was disposed of by not answering the proposed question. No finding was given on the merits of whether the proceedings under Section 147 were initiated without application of mind.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad, filed a Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal challenges an order dated 7.2.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'D' Bench, Ahmedabad, in Cross Objections No. 189 of 2019. The assessment year in question is 2010-2011. The core of the dispute revolves around the ITAT's finding that the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act without applying their mind, rendering the proceedings void ab initio. The assessee is Ambe Tradecorp Private Limited (formerly known as J.P. Fincorp Services Pvt. Ltd.).

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal has erred in holding that proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were initiated by the Assessing Officer without application of mind and accordingly, the proceedings were void ab initio. The Revenue, the appellant, contends that the ITAT erred in its conclusion regarding the application of mind by the Assessing Officer during the initiation of reassessment proceedings. The Revenue's specific arguments or reliance on any authorities are not recorded in the judgment. The Assessee, the respondent, is not recorded as having made any arguments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/319/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 319 of 2022 ========================================================== THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD Versus AMBE TRADECORP PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS J.P. FINCORP SERVICES PVT. LTD.) ========================================================== Appearance: MR. M.R.BHATT, SR. ADV. WITH MR. KARAN SANGHANI, ADV. FOR M R BHATT & CO.(5953) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 11/07/2022

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) This Tax Appeal is filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) raising the following substantial question of law arising out of the order dated 7.2.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ Bench, Ahmedabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in Cross Objections No. 189 of 2019 for the Assessment Year 2010-2011 “Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law the Appellate Tribunal has erred in holding that proceedings under section 147 of the Act was initiated by the Assessing Officer without application of mind and accordingly, the proceedings were void ab initio” C/TAXAP/319/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2022 By an order of even date passed in Tax Appeal No. 318 of 2022,

the appeal filed by the Revenue on merits is summarily dismissed. Therefore, the question raised in this appeal with regard to the re-opening of the Assessment Year under consideration is not required to be answered as the same would be an academic exercise. This Appeal is accordingly also disposed of by not answering the the proposed question. (N.V.ANJARIA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) C.M. JOSHI

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →