M/S LAKHI GEMS vs. I T O WARD 21 JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/45/2015HC RajasthanRJHC02052518201510 May 20162 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court observed that if the issue raised by the appellant regarding Section 80HHC was not addressed by the Tribunal, the appellant should have filed a rectification application instead of approaching the High Court by way of appeal. The Court noted that the appellant raised other questions of law on facts but stated that the appeal cannot be admitted in the absence of a substantial question of law. Regarding the addition sustained by the ITAT on account of unverifiable purchases to the extent of 15%, the Court referred to its earlier decision in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.43/2015, M/s. G.B. Impex Vs. ITO, holding that no substantial question of law was involved in such a matter. The Court found no other substantial question of law involved. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to file a rectification application before the Tribunal on the question concerning Section 80HHC.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns an appeal filed by M/s Lakhi Gems (the appellant) against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on October 22, 2014. The appellant contends that substantial questions of law are involved. Specifically, the appellant argues that the ITAT failed to decide whether the deduction under Section 80HHC was claimed in the prescribed format and if Form 10CCAB was filed with the return. The appellant also raises other questions of law related to facts. The Revenue is the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Jaipur. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The appeal is before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellant had claimed deduction under Section 80HHC before the assessing officer in the prescribed format and filed Form 10CCAB along with the return, and if this issue was decided or answered by the Tribunal? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning Section 80HHC). Assessee's Contentions: The appellant argues that the Tribunal did not decide or answer the question regarding the claim for deduction under Section 80HHC and the filing of Form 10CCAB. The appellant also raises other questions of law on facts. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the Revenue regarding these issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80HHC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.45/2015 M/s Lakhi Gems Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Jaipur DATE OF ORDER : 10/05/2016 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. RANKA Mr. Gunjan Pathak, for appellant The present appeal has been filed to challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short “Tribunal”) dated 22nd October, 2014. Learned counsel submits that substantial questions of law are involved in the present appeal. He submits that the question as to whether appellant had claimed deduction under Section 80HHC before the assessing officer in prescribed format and did not file Form 10CCAB along with return, has not been decided by the Tribunal or if the issue has been considered, it has not been answered. The facts given above show that the issue raised by the appellant has not been addressed by the Tribunal and if that is so, the appellant should have made an application for rectification instead of approaching this court by way of appeal. The appellant has raised other question of laws on facts but the appeal cannot be admitted in absence of substantial

2 question of law. Apart from the above, one issue raised by the appellant about addition having been sustained by ITAT on account of unverifiable purchases to the extent of 15% of the purchases, has already been decided by this court in the case of D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.43/2015, M/s. G.B. Impex Vs. ITO where it is held that no substantial question of law is involved. We do not find that any other question of law is involved. In view of the above, this appeal is disposed of with the liberty to the appellant to file an application for rectification before the Tribunal on the question regarding Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act.

The appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid. [J.K. RANKA],J. [M.N. BHANDARI], J. FRBOHRA Certificate: “All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” Fateh Raj Bohra, Private Secretary

More judgments on Section 80HHC

All 1,083 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80HHC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →