RAJENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT S/O SHRI RATAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/221/2018HC RajasthanRJHC02062102201817 July 2018Bench: KALPESH SATYENDRA JHAVERI,VIJAY KUMAR VYAS2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. It noted that in view of the order passed in MA.48/JP/2018 dated May 14, 2018, whereby the MA was allowed and the Tribunal's judgment dated February 18, 2018, was re-considered, the present appeal would not survive. The Court clarified that if, after the MA, the appeal was decided against the appellant, the limitation period would commence from the date of the fresh decision of the appeal. The appellant was explicitly permitted to argue all points before the Tribunal. Therefore, no specific findings were made on the substantial questions of law raised, and no operative directions were issued other than disposing of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, is challenging a judgment and order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which dismissed his appeal. The ITAT's order was a consequence of a Miscellaneous Application (MA) filed by the assessee, which led to a re-consideration of the Tribunal's earlier judgment dated February 18, 2018. The specific details of the original assessment proceedings, the assessment year(s), the exact amount in dispute, and the procedural history prior to the MA are not explicitly recorded in this judgment. The High Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that the entire differential receipts as per the 26AS statement were taxable in the hands of the assessee-appellant? 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in ignoring the assessee-appellant's submission that the Net Profit Rate ought to be applied on such differential receipts? 3. Whether the ITAT was correct in ignoring the assessee-appellant's submission that since the deductee had debited amounts towards sales tax deducted, interest expense, and direct purchases, relief thereof ought to have been given to the assessee-appellant? Assessee's Contentions: For question 1, the assessee argued that the entire differential receipts in the 26AS statement were not necessarily taxable. For question 2, the assessee contended that a Net Profit Rate should have been applied to the differential receipts. For question 3, the assessee argued that relief should have been granted considering the deductee's debits for sales tax, interest, and direct purchases against the credit reflected in the 26AS statement. Revenue's Contentions: No specific contentions for the revenue are recorded in this judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 221/2018 Rajendra Singh Shekhawat S/o Shri Ratan Singh Shekhawat , Aged About 55 Years, 97-A, Goyal Farms, Sunder Vihar, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan ----Appellant Versus Income Tax Officer , Ward 3(1), Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Statute Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KALPESH SATYENDRA JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Order 17/07/2018 By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee-appellant herein. Counsel for the appellant has framed the following substantial questions of law:- “i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. Tribunal was correct in law in holding that entire differential receipts as per 26AS statement was taxable in the hands of the assessee appellant? ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. Tribunal was correct in law in ignoring

(2 of 2) [ITA-221/2018] the submission of the assessee appellant that in the instant matter Net Profit Rate ought to be applied on such differential receipts.” iii) Whehter in the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. Tribunal was correct in law in ignoring the submission of the assessee appellant that as against credit reflected in 26AS statement the deductee itself had also debited amount towards (sales tax deducted), (interest expense) and (direct purchase and thus relief thereof ought to have been given to the assessee appellant?” In view of the order passed in MA.48/JP/2018 dated 14th May, 2018, whereby the MA was allowed and the judgment of the Tribunal dated 18th February, 2018 was re-considered, in our considered opinion, this appeal will not survive. However, if in case after MA, the appeal is decided against the present appellant, the limitation will start from the date of the decision of appeal afresh. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and it will be open for appellant to argue all points before the Tribunal. The appeal stands disposed of. (VIJAY KUMAR VYAS),J (K.S. JHAVERI),J A.Sharma/63

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →