ASST.COMM. INCOME TAX CIRCLE vs. NANDLAL JASWANI RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
TAXC/38/2011HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01013940200704 July 2013Author: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Assessee's turnover exceeded the amount mentioned under Section 44AD of the Act, rendering the section inapplicable. The Tribunal had accepted the Assessee's declared income rate of 7% on the ground that the previous year's accepted income was 6.09%. The High Court found this to be a finding of fact. The Court found no illegality in the Tribunal's finding and concluded that the appeal had no merit. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (the Revenue) is appealing an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur (the Tribunal) dated February 15, 2007. This order allowed the appeal of Shri Nandlala Jaswani (the Assessee) for the assessment year 2001-2002. The Assessee, a contractor, had a turnover of ₹6.66 crores and filed a return showing income at 7%. The Assessing Officer (AO) disagreed and assessed the income at 8% by an order dated March 31, 2004. The Assessee's appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT-A) was dismissed on November 7, 2006. The Assessee then appealed to the Tribunal, which allowed the appeal, accepting the Assessee's declared income rate of 7%. The Revenue has now filed this appeal before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in law and on facts by accepting the Assessee's declared income rate of 7% for the assessment year 2001-2002, despite the Assessing Officer's assessment at 8% and the dismissal of the Assessee's appeal by the CIT-A, turning on the applicability of Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: The Assessee argued that the Tribunal correctly accepted the income rate of 7% based on the previous year's accepted income of 6.09%. The Assessee also contended that Section 44AD of the Act was not applicable due to the turnover exceeding the prescribed limit. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the Tribunal's finding was illegal and that the appeal had merit. The Revenue's specific arguments regarding the assessment at 8% and the rejection of the Assessee's 7% rate are not detailed, but the appeal is based on challenging the Tribunal's decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AD,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

lA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURECHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR— ~~~Y^o CcJc(lncome Tax App^QNo. ^X ^QQ^ ZoK Appellant /' ^ssistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1 (1), Raipur. ^Shri. Nandlala Jaswani, Proprietor, M/s. Macdum ^ VERSUS Respondent : ^^,^iia'^£^r>- M^WOM^a^- ^!^^ " ^^ ^.^^—^^ Bhatapara, District: 9M.........^.I.W.^— Raipu^C'GF Income Tax apoeal u/s 260 A of Income Tay Act 1961 Pi^ ^ '^

{!^ ^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI YATINDRA SINGH, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI PRITINKER DIWAKER, J Tax Case flncome Tax Appeall No. 38 of 2011 Appellant : Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Respondent VERSUS Shri Nandlala Jaswani Income Taxappeal under section 260A of Income Tax Act. 1961 Appearance: Shri Sanjay Lal, counsel for the Appellant. Shri SR Rao, counsel for the Respondent. JUDGEMENT (05thJuly,2013)

1.

This is an appeal under section 260Aofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur (the Tribunal) dated 15.02.2007 allowing the appeal of Shri Nandlala Jaswani (the Assessee) for the assessment year 2001-2002. THE FACTS

2.

The Assessee is a contractor. His turn-over for the assessment year 2001-02 was ^6.66 crores. He filed his return showing the income @7%. However, the Assessing Officer (the AO) did not accept the same by his orderdated 31.03.2004 and assessed the income @8%.

3.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (the CIT-A). It was dismissed on 07.11.2006. 4. The Assessee filed second appeal before the Tribunal. It was allowed on 15.02.2007. The Tribunal held the income of the Assessee to be @7%. Hence, the present appeal by the Income Tax Department. THEDECISION

5.

We have heard counsel for the parties.

fc'

6.

The turn-over of the Assessee was more than the amount mentioned under section 44-AD of the Act and as such it was not applicable. The Tribunal by its order dated has accepted the rate of income given by the Assessee @7% on the ground that the last year's accepted income was @6.09%. This is a finding of fact.

7.

There is no illegality in the finding recorded by the Tribunal. The appeal has no merit. It is dismissed. Chief Jusdce Pritinker Diwaker Judge

More judgments on Section 44AD

All 2,222 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AD →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →