The Commissioner vs. Satish Chand Samirmal Gothi

PDF · subscribers
ITA/44/2012HC Madhya Pradesh08 September 2015Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA MENON1 pages
For Petitioner: Sanjay Lal
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that no substantial question of law was involved in the appeal. It observed that the concurrent findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal were based on a due appreciation of the account books and various documents available on record. The Tribunal considered the matter to be a pure question of fact. Therefore, as the concurrent orders were passed on an appreciation of facts based on the material available, the Tribunal found no substantial question of law warranting reconsideration. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the concurrent orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeals pertain to a block assessment conducted for the period from April 1, 1996, to October 25, 2002, at the residential premises of the respondent assessee. The appellate authorities had allowed certain deductions based on their appreciation of the account books and other documents available on record.

What were the issues?

1. Whether there is a substantial question of law involved in the Revenue's appeal, warranting reconsideration of the concurrent orders passed by the lower appellate authorities. The Revenue contended that the lower appellate authorities erred in allowing certain deductions. The assessee argued that the deductions were rightly allowed based on the evidence on record. The Tribunal noted that the concurrent findings of the lower appellate authorities were based on a due appreciation of the account books and various documents available on record.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

I.T.A.No.44/2012 8.9.2015 Shri Rajeshh Pandey, counsel for appellant. Shri Sapan Usrethe, counsel for respondent. This is revenue's appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, calling in question the concurrent orders passed by the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in the matter of allowing certain deductions for the block assessment conducted for the period from 1.4.1996 to 25.10.2002 at the residential premises of respondent. Taking note of the account books and other documents available on record, the concurrent findings have been recorded by both the appellate authorities for permitting the deductions. The deductions allowed are based on due appreciation of account books and various documents. It is a pure question of fact and as the concurrent orders are passed on appreciation of facts based on the material available on record, we find no substantial question of law involved in this appeal, warranting reconsideration. This appeal is therefore dismissed.

(RAJENDRA MENON) (S.K.SETH) M JUDGE JUDGE

More judgments on Section 260-A

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →