IN-CHARGE PRINCIPAPL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD vs. GAUTAM RATILAL DESAI

TAXAP/396/2019HC GujaratGJHC24028407201915 July 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. RAO2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The Revenue, represented by the In-Charge Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad, has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal is directed against an order dated 12/12/2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad, in ITA No. 884/Ahd/2017/SRT. This order pertains to Assessment Year 2008-09. The core of the appeal concerns the ITAT's decision to set aside an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history leading to this appeal involves the ITAT's decision on a revisionary order passed by the Principal Commissioner.

Held

The High Court held that the question raised by the Revenue was no longer res-integra. It was squarely covered by the decision of the High Court itself in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arvind Jewellers, reported in [2003] 259 ITR (Gujarat). Based on this precedent, the Court found no reason to interfere with the ITAT's order. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The specific reasoning of the ITAT that led to setting aside the Section 263 order is not detailed in this judgment, as the High Court focused on the binding precedent. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was correct in setting aside the order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act? The Revenue's contention is that the ITAT erred in setting aside the order passed under Section 263. The judgment does not explicitly record the Revenue's detailed arguments or specific legal provisions relied upon beyond Section 263. The Assessee's (Gautam Ratilal Desai) contention is not recorded in the judgment. The judgment states that the question proposed by the Revenue is no longer res-integra and is squarely covered by a previous decision of the High Court.

Sections Cited

260A, 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/TAXAP/396/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 396 of 2019 ========================================================== IN-CHARGE PRINCIPAPL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD Versus GAUTAM RATILAL DESAI ========================================================== Appearance: MRS KALPANAK RAVAL(1046) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO Date : 15/07/2019

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)

1.00.

This Tax Appeal under section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is at the instance of the revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad dated 12/12/2018 in ITA No.884/Ahd/2017/ SRT for A.Y. 2008-09. 2. 00. The revenue has proposed the following questions :- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was correct in setting aside the order u/s. 263 of the IT Act?” C/TAXAP/396/2019

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.

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →