Commissioner Of Income Tax vs. M/S Kapil Kesharwani & Co.

ITA/86/2011HC Madhya Pradesh24 April 2014Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA MENON2 pages

For Petitioner: Sanjeev Tuli

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal. The Court observed that a coordinate bench of the same court had already considered identical questions in ITA No. 57/2011, concerning another liquor contractor. In that earlier case, the court had passed a detailed order on April 3, 2013, which considered and rejected the substantial questions of law. Therefore, keeping in view the order dated April 3, 2013, and the reasons provided therein, the High Court found no reason to reconsider the substantial question of law involved in the present appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. No specific finding was recorded on the merits of the suppression of fact or the rejection of books of accounts in this judgment, as it relied on a prior decision.

What were the facts?

This is a revenue appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated January 14, 2011, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jabalpur. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2005-06. The core of the dispute revolves around the Tribunal's deletion of an addition made by the revenue. The revenue's addition was based on the alleged suppression of facts, specifically that the addition was made after rejecting the assessee's books of accounts and evaluating the stock register, which reflected unaccounted sales. The High Court noted that a similar issue concerning another liquor contractor had already been considered by a coordinate bench of the court in ITA No. 57/2011.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the deletion ordered by the Tribunal on account of suppression of fact, where such addition was made after rejection of the books of accounts, is arbitrary? (Question of law) 2. Whether the deletion based on suppression after evaluating the stock register, on account of unaccounted sales reflected, is arbitrary? (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the Tribunal's deletion of the addition was arbitrary. The addition was made after rejecting the assessee's books of accounts and upon evaluation of the stock register, which revealed unaccounted sales. The revenue contended that the Tribunal erred in deleting this addition based on suppression of facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA NO.86/2011

24/04//2014 Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the appellant. Exemption from filing certified copy and Service Certificate as prayed for vide I.A.No.2040/2014 is allowed. Learned counsel for the appellant is heard on the question of admission. This is a revenue appeal under section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, calling in question the order dated 14-01-2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur for assessment year 2005-06. The question posed for considering in this appeal is as to whether the deletion ordered by the Tribunal on account of suppression of fact that such addition was made after rejection of the books of accounts is arbitrary or not. That apart deletion based on suppression after evaluating the stock register has been conveyed on account of un accounted sales reflected. The question as has been put forth in this appeal with regard to another liquor contractor on similar consideration has already been considered by a coordinate Bench of this court in ITA No.57/2011 and identical questions have already been considered and rejected by a detailed order passed on 03-04-2013. Keeping in view the order dated 03-04-2013 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this court in ITA No.57/2011 and considering the reasons as indicated therein, we see no reason to consider the substantial question of law involved in the matter warranting any further reconsideration, the appeal is therefore dismissed.

(RAJENDRA MENON) (A.K.SHARMA ) JUDGE JUDGE hsp

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →