C.I.T. JALANDHAR vs. INDU BALA SHARMA HOSHIARPUR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Court noted that the assessee had proved the receipt of the amount and its utilization for purchasing Indira Vikas Patras. Furthermore, the finding of fact regarding the explanation provided by the assessee for the receipt of the amounts was not challenged by the Revenue. The Tribunal had also followed its own order in the assessee's case for the subsequent assessment year 1989-90. The Court concluded that the Revenue had not been able to demonstrate any error in the Tribunal's finding. Therefore, the question of law was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The reference was disposed of accordingly.
What were the facts?
The case involves an Income Tax Reference (ITR No. 531 of 1995) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, arising from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar Bench, dated August 31, 1992. The assessment year in question is 1988-89. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 30,000 to the assessee's income, contending that the identity of the person from whom this amount was received was not established. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vacated this addition, and the ITAT upheld the appellate authority's order by dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The assessee had demonstrated that the amount was received and utilized for purchasing Indira Vikas Patras.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has been correct in dismissing the Revenue's appeal against the Dy.CIT(A)'s order vacating the addition of Rs. 30,000/- made in the assessment for the assessment year 1988-89? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. However, the facts indicate the assessee established the receipt and utilization of the amount. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the identity of the person from whom the amount was received was not established, justifying the addition. The Revenue's appeal to the Tribunal was dismissed, and the High Court was asked to consider if this dismissal was correct.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITR No.531 of 1995 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No.531 of 1995
Date of decision:27.10.2006 The Commissioner of Income tax, Jalandhar
....Petitioner versus Shri Indu Bala Sharma, Hoshiarpur. ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Dr. N.L. Sharda, Advocate, for the revenue. JUDGMENT: Following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short, 'the Tribunal') arising out of its order dated 31.8.1992 in ITA No.762(ASR)/1991, in respect of assessment year 1988-89:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has been correct in dismissing the Revenue's appeal against the Dy.CIT(A)'s order vacating the addition of Rs.30,000/- made in the assessment for the assessment year 1988-89?” The Assessing Officer added Rs.30,000/- to the income of the assessee on the ground that identity of the person from whom the said amount was received by the assessee, was not established. The appellate authority vacated the said addition which was upheld by the Tribunal. It was held that the asessee was proved to have received the amount, which was duly utilised for purchase of Indira Vikas Patras. The Tribunal also followed its order in the case of the assessee in respect of assessment year 1989-90. Learned counsel for the revenue has not been able to show that finding in respect of the previous year was challenged by the revenue. Moreover, the finding as to explanation by the assessee about the receipt of
ITR No.531 of 1995 2 the amounts is a finding of fact. In above circumstances, the question is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Reference is disposed of accordingly. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge October 27, 2006 (Rajesh Bindal) 'gs' Judge
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
