CIT-II vs. ARVIND SINGH GREWAL

ITA/429/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093361201009 September 2013Author: MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH,MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Avinash Singh Grewal, filed his return for assessment year 2006-07, declaring a loss from business and income from agriculture. The Assessing Officer made additions for short-term capital gains, interest on bank deposits, and income from undisclosed sources. The assessee appealed only on the issue of interest on bank deposits, amounting to ₹20,88,282/-. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, relying on prior orders. The revenue appealed to the Tribunal, which dismissed the revenue's appeal, citing this court's decision in CIT v. Karanbir Singh. The revenue then filed the present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the Tribunal's order.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its order of even date in ITA No.162 of 2009 (the assessee's own case for assessment year 2005-06), after following the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. Ghanshyam (2009) 315 ITR 1, had set aside the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for a fresh decision after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. Applying the same reasoning to the present appeal, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 24.8.2009 passed by the Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal to decide it afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. The appeal was allowed to the extent of remand.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing the revenue's appeal and upholding the deletion of addition on account of interest received on bank deposits, amounting to ₹20,88,282/-, for assessment year 2006-07, turning on the interpretation of Section 143(1) and the applicability of precedents. Assessee's Contention: The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was limited to the issue of interest on bank deposits. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, relying on its own prior order and the Tribunal's order for the preceding assessment year. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, referencing this court's decision in CIT v. Karanbir Singh. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, aggrieved by the Tribunal's dismissal of its appeal, contended that the Tribunal erred in its decision. The revenue has preferred the present appeal under Section 260-A of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.429 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 429 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 9.9.2013 Commissioner of Income Tax II, Chandigarh -----Appellant Vs. Shri Avinash Singh Grewal ----Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH Present:- Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the revenue. None for the respondent. Ajay Kumar Mittal,J.

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”) against the order dated 24.8.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench-B (in short, “the Tribunal”) in ITA No.642/Chandi/2009, for the assessment year 2006-07. It was ordered to be heard alongwith ITA No.162 of 2009, as identical question of law is involved therein, which has been reproduced in the said appeal.

2.

Briefly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy, as available on record, may be noticed. The assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of ` (-) 4,00,889/- from business and ` 14,76,000/- from agriculture on 1.8.2006 which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 20.10.2006. T

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →