SRI GANESHAN V vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE

PDF · subscribers
ITA/9/2016HC KeralaKLHC01026808201604 March 2016Author: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (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 in the appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal, with no specific issues left undecided as the appeal itself was dismissed on the ground of not raising a substantial question of law.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Ganeshan V, filed a return of income for the assessment year 2007-2008. 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. 28,58,850/- and raising a demand. The assessee contended that a portion of the assessed income was received as loans from financial institutions and that the additions made by the assessing authority, including towards interest, were unjustified and excessive. The first appellate authority dismissed the assessee's appeal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, also refused to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the additions made by the assessing authority to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 2007-2008 were justified, considering the assessee's claim that a part of the income was obtained as loans from financial institutions? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 143(3) and Section 147 of the Income Tax Act). 2. Whether the additions made towards interest were excessive? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 143(3) and Section 147 of the Income Tax Act). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that part of the income assessed was obtained as loans from financial institutions and that the additions made by the assessing authority, including towards interest, were not justified and were excessive. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the revenue before the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/14TH PHALGUNA, 1937 ITA.No. 9 of 2016 () --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 98/COCH/2014 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 18-07-2014 APPELLANT/APPELLANT: -------------------------- SRI GANESHAN V 'POOJA', CHERUVANNUR, FEROKE KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH SMT.O.A.NURIYA KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) KOZHIKODE-673001. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-03- 2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I.T.A.No.9 of 2016 = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4 th day of March, 2016

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 2007-2008. 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.28,58,850/- 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 and refused to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority.

I.T.A.No.9/16 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 Income Tax Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Judge Anu Sivaraman, Judge

sj4/3 // P.A. to Judge

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →