Income Tax Department vs. M/S Jaideep Ispat And Alloy Pvt. Ltd.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/231/2022HC Madhya Pradesh02 February 2023Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI3 pages
For Petitioner: Veena Mandlik
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial question of law raised by the appellant was identical to the question considered by a Division Bench of the same Court at the Gwalior Bench in ITA No. 21/2019, ITA No. 31/2019, and ITA No. 32/2019 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gahoi Foods Private Ltd). In that case, by an order dated July 12, 2019, the appeals were disposed of holding that in the given facts, as no incriminating documents were found during the search, the order under appeal could not be considered to have suffered any illegality giving rise to the substantial question of law. Consequently, those appeals were dismissed. Following this precedent, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the present appeal and accordingly dismissed it. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, has filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order dated March 8, 2022, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bench Indore. The ITAT order pertains to ITA No. 268/Ind/2019 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The appeal before the ITAT involved cross-appeals arising from orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which dealt with additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on presumptive income and estimated income. A key fact not disputed is that the additions made by the AO were not based on any incriminating material found during a search.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, in the absence of any incriminating documents seized during a search, the Assessing Officer is justified in making additions in non-abated assessment orders under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? The appellant (Revenue) contends that the AO is justified in making such additions. The respondent (Assessee) has not presented any arguments in this appeal. The Tribunal was seized with the matter and cross-appeals arising from orders passed by the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals). The appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was directed against the addition of income by the Assessing Officer taking production on a presumptive basis and working out estimated income. The factum of addition not being based on any incriminating material found during the search is not disputed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA ON THE 2nd OF FEBRUARY, 2023 INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 231 of 2022 BETWEEN:- PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) AAYKAR BHAWAN HOSHANGABAD ROAD BHOPAL, (MADHYA PRADESH) .....APPELLANT (MS VEENA MANDLIK, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT). AND M/S JAIDEEP ISPAT AND ALLOY PVT. LTD. ADD: 103 LAXMI TOWER 576 M.G. ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS (NONE PRESENT FOR THE RESPONDENT) This appeal coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI passed the following: ORDER This appeal u/S 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961(for short, the Act of 1961 hereinafter) is directed against the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench Indore in ITA No. 268/Ind/2019(Assessee's Appeal) for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The substantial question of law which has been raised by the appellant in this appeal is "whether in absence of any incriminating documents seized during the course of search, the Assessing Officer is justified in making the addition in 1 Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 2/3/2023 6:27:16 PM Signature Not Verified non-abated assessment orders u/S 153-A r/W Sec 143(3) of the Act of 1961." The assessment u/S 153A r/W Sec143(3) of the Act of 1961 is for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16 and u/S 143(3) of the Act of 1961 for the assessment year 2016-17. Learned Tribunal was in seisin with the appellant and cross appeals arising from respective orders passed by the Commissioner Income Tax(Appeals). The appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was directed against the addition of income by the Assessing Officer taking production on presumptive basis and working out estimated income. The factum of addition not being based on any incriminating material found during the search is not disputed. Exactly identical substantial question of law came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court at Gwalior Bench in ITA No. 21/2019, ITA No. 31/2019 and ITA No. 32/2019(Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gahoi Foods Private Ltd). Vide order dated 12.07.2019, these appeals were disposed of holding that in the given facts of the present case, as no incriminating documents during the course of search were found, the order in appeal cannot be said to have suffered any illegality as would give rise to proposed substantial question of law. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed. In view of the fact that the aforesaid question of law was dealt by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid cases, no different view can be taken in this appeal. Accordingly, finding no substantial question of law, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. 2 Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 2/3/2023 6:27:16 PM Signature Not Verified (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE sh

3 Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 2/3/2023 6:27:16 PM Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →