Commissioner Of Income Tax vs. Shankarlal Aswani

PDF · subscribers
ITA/163/2009HC Madhya Pradesh04 March 2014Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA MENON2 pages
For Petitioner: Sanjeev Tuli
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and affirmed by the Appellate Tribunal could not be termed as erroneous or illegal. It found that the orders were based on proper consideration and due appreciation of the material available on record. The Tribunal observed that the questions raised by the Revenue as substantial questions of law were, in fact, challenges to the deletions permitted by the appellate authorities based on their subjective satisfaction and discretion in appreciating documents and account books. Therefore, the Tribunal found no substantial question of law involved that warranted interference. The appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

This revenue appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenges an order dated 3.4.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The respondent assessee, a wholesale purchaser of grains and soya beans, filed a return for assessment year 1994-95 declaring an income tax of Rs.76,770/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3), determining the total income at Rs.18,62,640/-. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT(A)), who partly allowed the appeal on 1.7.1998, permitting certain deletions. The Revenue appealed to the ITAT against deletions concerning Rs.3,58,352/- (unexplained cash credit) and Rs.1,51,678/- (unrecorded profit from sale of Chana). The assessee also challenged certain disallowances. The ITAT decided both appeals by a consolidated order. The Revenue's appeal is against the ITAT upholding the CIT(A)'s deletions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the deletion of Rs.3,58,352/- on account of unexplained cash credit, which is a substantial question of law. 2. Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the deletion of Rs.1,51,678/- on account of unrecorded profit for the sale of Chana, which is a substantial question of law. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the assessee before the Tribunal. However, it notes that the assessee also challenged certain disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the ITAT's order upholding the deletions made by the CIT(A) was erroneous and illegal. It contended that the questions raised were substantial questions of law, not merely challenges to the subjective satisfaction and discretion of the appellate authorities in appreciating documents and account books.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.163/2009 4/3/2014 : Shri Sanjay Lal , learned counsel for the appellant. This is a revenue appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order dated 3.4.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the matter of permitting certain deductions to the respondent assessee for the return of income tax filed in the year 1994-1995. Respondent assessee is a wholesale purchaser of grains and soya beans. For the year 1994-95 a return was filed declaring the income tax at Rs.76,770/-. Assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) and total income was determined at Rs.18,62,640/- vide order Annexure A/1. Aggrieved thereof the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Income Tax which allowed the appeal in part and vide order Annexure A/2 dated 1.7.1998 permitted certain deletion. Challenging the deletion made particularly with regard to an amount of Rs.3,58,352/- on account of unexplained cash credit and further a deletion of Rs.1,51,678/- on account of unrecorded profit for sale of Chana, appeal was filed by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore. The assessee also challenged disallowing certain claim made by him. Both the appeals have been decided by consolidated order Annexure A/3 and as the - 1 -1 -:2:- deletion permitted by the Commissioner, Appeal, has been upheld by the Tribunal, this appeal has been filed. Having heard Shri Sanjay Lal and on perusal of the record, we find that from para 7 onwards, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has assessed the matter and after going through the record and material available, given detailed reasons for upholding the order of Commissioner. The order passed by the Commissioner, Income Tax and affirmed by the Appellate Tribunal cannot be termed as erroneous or illegal. They are based on proper consideration and on due appreciation of the material available on record and we see no substantial question of law involved in the matter warranting interference in these proceedings. The questions raised as substantial questions of law are not questions of law but are in fact the challenge made to the deletion permitted by the Appellate Authority based on their subjective satisfaction of the documents and discretion exercised in the matter of permitting the deletion based on the appreciation of documents and the account books. The same does not call for any interference. Appeal is therefore, dismissed. ( Rajendra Menon) ( J. K. Jain ) Judge Judge mrs.mishra - 2

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →