COMMISSIONER OF INCOM-TAX vs. SHRI SANJEEV KUMAR

ITR/7/2001HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01042158200105 December 2006Author: MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

These three Income Tax References (ITR Nos. 7, 7A, and 7B of 2001) were filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana, against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench. The assessment year in question is 1981-82. The ITAT had deleted an addition made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) concerning unexplained investment in the purchase of shares. The High Court had previously granted the Revenue four weeks to file the paper book, failing which the references would be returned unanswered. This order was passed on November 3, 2006, with the next hearing scheduled for December 5, 2006. Despite the liberty granted, the paper book was not filed by the Revenue.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to return the references unanswered. The Court noted that the references had been pending for six years and that the Revenue had been granted four weeks' time to file the paper book, failing which the references would be returned unanswered. Despite this liberty, the paper book was not filed by the Revenue. Therefore, the Court returned the references unanswered. The substantive issue regarding the deletion of the addition by the ITAT was not decided on merits due to the procedural default of the Revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained investment in the purchase of shares, worked out by the ITO on the basis of proved facts/collateral evidence in the possession of the Department? The Revenue contended that the Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting the addition. The Revenue relied on proved facts and collateral evidence in its possession to justify the addition made by the ITO. The judgment does not record any specific arguments or reliance on authorities by the Revenue beyond this general statement. The Assessees' arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:5.12.2006 1. I.T.R. No.7 of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Sanjeev Kumar, Ludhiana .....Respondent 2. I.T.R. No.7A of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Rajeev Kumar, Ludhiana .....Respondent 3. I.T.R. No.7B of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Amit Kumar (minor), Ludhiana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Mr. S.K.Garg Narwana, Advocate for the petitioner. ****

ORDER The following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court arising out of order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.733 to 736/Chandi / 89 dated 5.6.1990 in respect of assessment year 1981-82:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained investment in 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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →