M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(2)

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/1924/2010HC GujaratGJHC24046298201028 October 2021Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, acceding to the request of the appellant's advocate, disposed of the Tax Appeal as not pressed. The Court explicitly stated that it was not entering into the merits of the case and was not expressing any opinion on the substantial questions of law. The operative direction was to allow the withdrawal of the appeal. The judgment also noted that if the appellant is unable to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for some reason, it would be open for them to take legal recourse available under the law. No specific finding was given on the penalty or the addition of investment.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by M/s Acid & Chemicals Co. against an order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 12(2). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The appeal challenges the Tribunal's decision to uphold a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) concerning an addition of investment upheld under Section 68. The procedural history indicates that the High Court admitted the appeal for considering substantial questions of law on January 25, 2012. The assessee is now seeking to withdraw the appeal to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, having received Form No. 3.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in upholding the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) in relation to the addition of investment confirmed under Section 68 in the hands of the assessee. 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in upholding the levy of penalty when one of the partners, whose statement was recorded, indicated that the cash credit was generated between 1987 and 2000. Assessee's contention: The assessee, represented by Mr. Ketan Shah, sought to withdraw the appeal to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, having received Form No. 3. They requested permission to withdraw the appeal. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the merits of the case. The revenue was served, and learned senior advocate Mr. Manish Bhatt appeared.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1924 of 2010 ========================================================== M/S ACID & CHEMICALS CO Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(2) ========================================================== Appearance: MR KETAN H SHAH(2705) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED(64) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 LD SR ADV. MR.MANISH BHATT for the Opponent(s) No.1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

Date : 28/10/2021

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1. For

considering

the

substantial question of law on 25.01.2012, this Court has admitted this appeal. Following are the substantial question of law. “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of the addition of investment which it upheld under Section 68 in the hands of the assessee in assessment appeal? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 the case the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the levy of penalty though one of the partners, whose statement was recorded,has stated that this cash credit is generated from the year 1987 to 2000?” 2. Learned advocate, Mr.Ketan Shah submits that the appellant is desirous of availing the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and Form No.3 has already been received. Once he withdraws the pending tax appeal, he will be given the Form No.4 and therefore, the Court may permit to withdraw the present appeal. 3. Acceding to the request, the Tax Appeal is disposed of as not pressed, without entering into the merits and expressing any opinion. 4. If for some reasons the appellant is Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/1924/2010 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021 unable to avail the benefit of the scheme, it shall be open for the appellant to take legal recourse, available under the law. Sd/- (SONIA GOKANI, J) Sd/- (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →