PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, SURAT-2 vs. M/S SUMUKH SYNTHETICS PVT LTD

C/TAXAP/648/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 648 of 2018 ================================================================ PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, SURAT-2 Versus M/S SUMUKH SYNTHETICS PVT LTD ================================================================ Appearance: MRS KALPANAK RAVAL(1046) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 26/06/2018

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad dated 24.07.2017 passed in ITA No.1048/Ahd./2016 for the Assessment Year : 2012-2013, by which the learned Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the learned Assessing Officer, so far as disallowance of Rs.50,00,000/= in respect of M/s. Tirth Impex Private Limited is concerned, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed questions of law :- Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/648/2018 ORDER “(A) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in setting-aside the additions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of investment made by the company M/s Tirth Impex Pvt Ltd of Rs.50 lakhs and deleting the remaining addition made on account of unexplained share capital and share premium without appreciating the fact that the assessee had failed to produce the investors before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings? (B) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in deleting the addition made on account of unaccounted commission on share moneys amounting to Rs.1,50,398/- without appreciating the fact that the share moneys produced by the assessee company was an accommodation entry only?” 2. We have heard learned Advocate Mrs. Kalpana Raval appearing on behalf of the Revenue. We have considered and perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal. At the outset it is required to be noted that the assessing officer made a disallowance of Rs.50,00,000/= in respect of the investments made by the M/s. Tirth Impex Private Limited, doubting the said investments and as such relied upon the Report submitted by the Vigilance Officer and/or the Inspector. However, it is required to be noted and as observed by the learned Tribunal, the said enquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer and the Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/648/2018 ORDER Report submitted by the Inspector, was behind the back of the assessee. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, when the learned Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, in respect of the investments made by M/s. Tirth Impex Private Limited, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error. When the matter is remitted, no substantial question of law can be said to have arisen, more particularly in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. In view of the above, the present Tax Appeal deserves to be dismissed and is hereby, dismissed. Sd/- (M.R. SHAH, J) Sd/- (A.Y. KOGJE, J) CAROLINE Page 3 of 3