THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.SUSHIL THOMAS ABRAHAM

ITA/94/2010HC KeralaKLHC01026786201026 February 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON10 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sushil Thomas Abraham, a contractor, did not file an income tax return for Assessment Year 1996-97 due to pending disputes with Skyline Builders. A search under Section 133A was conducted, and the assessee later filed a return disclosing an income of Rs. 6,08,680/- without paying admitted tax, citing the pending claims. The Assessing Officer assessed total income at Rs. 25,95,260/-. The CIT(A) rejected the appeal for non-payment of admitted tax. The ITAT remanded the matter. The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court. Meanwhile, a writ petition by the assessee regarding recovery of admitted tax was dismissed. The High Court's judgments were conflicting. Subsequently, a reassessment was made (Annexure-H), which was remanded by the CIT(A) (Annexure-I). The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal against this (Annexure-J). The Revenue has appealed this ITAT order.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court rejected the assessee's preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal. It held that Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which deals with review, has a wider ambit than Section 254 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's order rejecting the application for rectification of error under Section 254(2) does not vacate the original order in the same way a review order does. Therefore, the appeal against the original Tribunal order is maintainable. Regarding the substantive issue, the Court noted that the reassessment (Annexure R2(c)) taxed the contract receipts of Rs. 14,67,187/- with an estimated net profit of 8.1%, resulting in a demand of Rs. 2,785/- after adjustments. The Court found that the assessment taxed income that had actually come to the assessee in the relevant year, aligning with the real income theory. Consequently, the Court refused to answer the questions of law framed and rejected the appeal of the Revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether an appeal is maintainable against an order of the Tribunal passed under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when a prior order of the Tribunal on the same subject matter was challenged in review proceedings before the Tribunal. The assessee contended that the original Tribunal order merges with any subsequent order passed on review, citing Sushil Kumar Sen v. State of Bihar and Kunhayammed and Others v. State of Kerala and Another. The Revenue argued that Section 254 only allows rectification of errors, and the Tribunal merely rejected an application for rectification. 2. Whether the assessment carried out, taxing income that came to the assessee in the relevant year, is valid, considering the principle of real income. The Revenue implicitly argued for the validity of the assessment, while the assessee relied on the real income theory propounded in United Commercial Bank v. Commissioner of Income Tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 142(1),Section 140A,Section 254,Section 254(2),Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1939 ITA.No. 94 of 2010 ------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 387/COCH/2008 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH DATED 13.8.2009 APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT/REVENUE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE: SUSHIL THOMAS ABRAHAM, PROP. HOLEC BUILDERS, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC R1 BY ADV. DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA 94/2010 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE-A : COPY OF COMPUTATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH RETURN. ANNEXURE-B : COPY OF ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 26.3.1997. ANNEXURE-C : COPY OF

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 133A

All 5,787 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →