M/S SHRI KESHARIAJEE MARBLES PVT.P LTD vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE UDAIPUR

ITA/158/2007HC RajasthanRJHC01012528200626 February 2008Bench: SANGEET LODHA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal, in the circumstances of the case, were pure findings of fact and did not involve any substantial question of law as contemplated by Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court noted that each appellate authority had reconsidered the matter afresh and granted substantial relief to the assessee. Consequently, the High Court found no error in the impugned orders. The appeals were dismissed summarily as they had no force.

What were the facts?

These three appeals were filed by M/s Shri Kesheriajee Marbles Pvt. Ltd. against the common order of the learned Tribunal concerning three different assessment years. The Assessing Officer (AO) had rejected the assessee's books of accounts for not being correctly and completely maintained, and proceeded to make a best judgment assessment under Section 144. The AO considered the assessee's disclosed sales and gross profit rate, along with other circumstances, incorporating an element of guesswork. The Commissioner (Appeals) modified the AO's orders in favour of the assessee. Subsequently, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) further modified the orders of the AO and the Commissioner, also in favour of the assessee. The High Court reviewed the orders and heard the learned counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the orders impugned, which modified the assessment orders in favour of the assessee, involve any substantial question of law as contemplated by Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? The assessee contended that the appellate authorities have provided substantial relief after reconsidering the matter. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment, other than the fact that the appeals were filed against the ITAT's order. The High Court considered all aspects permissible within the scope of Section 260A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- (1) INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 158 of 2007 M/S SHRI KESHARIAJEE MARBLES PVT.(P) LTD V/S ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE UDAIPUR (2) INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 159 of 2007 M/S SHRI KESHARIAJEE MARBLES (P) LTD. V/S ACIT DCIT CIRCLE UDAIPUR

(3) INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 160 of 2007 M/S SHRI KESHARIAJEE MARBLES (P) LTD. V/S ACIT /DCIT CIRCLE UDAIPUR Ms. ABHILASHA SANCHETI for Mr. VIKAS BALIA, for the appellant / petitioner Date of Order : 26.2.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI SANGEET LODHA,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the appellant. These three appeals arise out of the common order of the learned Tribunal relating to three different assessment years. The Assessing Officer in all these years had found after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, that the books of accounts are not correctly, and completely maintained, and therefore, he proceeded to reject them, and then after giving opportunity of hearing

- 2 - made assessment under Section 144 i.e. best judgment assessment, wherein he took into account the figure of sales disclosed by the assessee, so also the gross profit rate, as declared by the assessee, and then considering the other attending totality of circumstances, made a best judgment assessment, of course, after invoking some amount of guesswork. These orders of the Assessing Officer have been modified in favour of the assessee in appeal by the learned Commissioner in various aspects. Then in further appeal before learned Tribunal, the learned Tribunal has also further modified the order of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner, in favour of the assessee. In our view, even after going through the three orders in detail, and hearing learned counsel on all aspects, which are not even permissible within the scope of Section 260A, we do not find any error in the orders impugned. It is significant to note that each Appellate Authority has reconsidered the matter afresh, and has given substantial relief to the assessee. In our view, the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal, in the circumstances of the case, are pure findings of fact, and do not involve any substantial question of law, as contemplated by Section 260A. The appeals thus, have no force, and are dismissed summarily.

( SANGEET LODHA ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →