SRI GANESHAN V vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2(1)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the ITAT had considered the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellant (assessee) and had arrived at a reasoned conclusion regarding the factual contentions. The Court found that no question of law, let alone a substantial question of law, arose for consideration under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the Income Tax Appeal was dismissed. The specific findings on the additions made by the assessing authority or the justification of loans are not detailed, as the appeal was dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arose.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Sri.Ganeshan V, filed a return of income for assessment year 2009-2010. Following a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147, assessing a total income of Rs. 31,99,600/-. The assessee contended that a portion of the assessed income was obtained as loans from financial institutions and that the additions made by the assessing authority, including towards interest, were unjustified. The first appellate authority dismissed the assessee's appeal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) also refused to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority. The present appeal is against the order of the ITAT.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the additions made by the assessing authority, including towards interest, were justified based on the facts, particularly concerning loans claimed to be obtained from financial institutions (Section 143(3) read with Section 147). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that a part of the income assessed was obtained as loans from financial institutions and that the additions made by the assessing authority were not justified by the facts. The additions towards interest were also impugned as being excessive. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue before the ITAT or the High Court.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Anu Sivaraman,J. 1.This appeal is directed against Annexure C order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant had filed a return of income for the assessment year 2009-2010. Pursuant to a survey conducted in the premises in terms of Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of that Act and a total income of Rs.31,99,600/- was assessed and a demand was raised. The assessee claimed that a part of the income assessed was obtained as loans from financial institutions and that the additions made by the assessing authority were not justified by the facts. The additions towards interest were also impugned as being excessive. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal on these points against which the assessee had gone in appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT considered the contentions raised and refused to interefere with the order of the first appellate authority.
I.T.A No.17 of 2016 2 From a reading of the order under challenge, it is clear that the ITAT has considered the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellant and had come to a reasoned conclusion as regards the factual contentions urged by the appellant. No question of law, much less, any substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. In the above circumstances, the IT Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Judge Anu Sivaraman, Judge
sj4/3 // P.A. to Judge
More judgments on Section 133A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ranchhodbhai Kurjibhai Kakadiya, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 553/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Amr Infrastructures, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle-2(1), HyderabadITA 818/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Vikaskumar Macwan, Nadiad vs Dc/ACIT Central Circle 3, VadodaraITA 2022/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026