PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(CENTRAL)-3 vs. SHRI RAM HARI RAM

PDF · subscribers

ITA/372/2018HC DelhiDLHC01539241201704 April 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court reached this conclusion for the same reasons it dismissed a similar appeal (ITA 285/2018) on March 12, 2018. In that prior case, the Court was of the opinion that no question of law was presented. Therefore, the present appeal is also dismissed on the same basis. The operative direction is the dismissal of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of on the preliminary ground of no question of law arising.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-3 (Revenue) appealed an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). This appeal concerned amounts brought to tax by the Revenue that exceeded the value surrendered by the assessee during a search. The assessee, Shri Ram Hari Ram, had succeeded before both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the ITAT. The High Court noted that a similar appeal, ITA 285/2018 concerning the same issue and involving the same Revenue authority, was dismissed on March 12, 2018, on the grounds that no question of law arose. The present appeal was filed for the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a substantial question of law arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the addition of amounts to the assessee's income over and above the surrendered value. Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. However, the fact that the assessee succeeded before the lower appellate authorities suggests their arguments were accepted. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that a question of law arises from the ITAT's order. The judgment does not specify the legal provisions or precedents relied upon by the Revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 372/2018, C.M. APPL.12587/2018

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(CENTRAL)-3 ..... Appellant Through : Sh. Rahul Chaudhary, Sr. Standing Counsel.

versus

SHRI RAM HARI RAM

..... Respondent Through : Sh. Sameer Rohatgi and Sh. Akshit Pradhan, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R %

04.04.2018

The Revenue challenges an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which is also the subject matter of another appeal, i.e. ITA 285/2018 [Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-3 v. Rajiv Gupta] and concerned the amounts brought to tax over and above the surrendered value or the amounts surrendered by the party whose premises were searched. The assessee’s contentions were successful concurrently before the lower appellate authorities, i.e. before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, like in the present case. That appeal, i.e. ITA 285/2018 was dismissed by order dated 12.03.2018 because the Court was of the opinion that no question of law arises. For the same reasons, the Court holds that no question of law arises. The appeal is accordingly dismissed along with the pending application.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

A. K. CHAWLA, J APRIL 04, 2018/AJK

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →