M/S.CRAFT CREATIONS vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF I

PDF · subscribers
TCA/101/2021HC Madras02 February 2021Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal due to a subsequent event: the assessee filing a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The Court directed the Competent Authority to process the declaration and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. The assessee was granted liberty to restore the appeal if the decision on their declaration was not in their favour. In such an event, the Registry was directed to entertain the restoration petition without insisting on a delay condonation application. Consequently, the substantial questions of law framed were left open and not decided on merits. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Craft Creations, filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras against an order dated 05.05.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai Bench. The appeal pertains to assessment year 2012-13. The assessee is challenging the ITAT's decision to estimate profit on the entire turnover, treat disputed purchases as bogus, and not follow VAT authorities' orders on quantum of purchases and sales. The Revenue is the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Tiruppur. During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee filed a declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, and was awaiting orders. The High Court noted this subsequent event.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the ITAT was correct in estimating profit on the entire turnover, implicitly rejecting audited books of accounts, despite the Assessing Officer accepting them except for disputed purchases and without recording requisite satisfaction? 2. Whether the ITAT was correct in adopting an income tax inspector's report to treat disputed purchases as bogus, despite the assessee furnishing documents at the appellate stage to prove their genuineness, thereby demonstrating perversity and violating principles of natural justice and fair procedure? 3. Whether the ITAT was correct in not following this High Court's precedents on the binding nature of VAT authorities' orders concerning the quantum of purchases and sales in the corresponding period? Assessee's Contentions: - The Assessing Officer accepted the books of accounts, with only disputed purchases being an issue. - The ITAT's adoption of the inspector's report to deem purchases bogus was perverse and violated natural justice. - The ITAT failed to follow the High Court's binding precedent on VAT authorities' orders. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records no specific contentions for the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TCA.No.101 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02.02.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM and The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.101 of 2021 M/s.Craft Creations, 76/1B, Malar Garden, Ganapathy Palayam Village, Ganapathy Palayam, Tiruppur - 641 605. PAN: AAFFC4199M ...Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Tiruppur. ...Respondent APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 05.05.2017 made in ITA.No.2658/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13. For Appellant: Mr.A.S.Sriraman For Respondent: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.101 of 2021 JUDGMENT (Delivered by

T.S.Sivagnanam,J

) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) challenging the order dated 05.05.2017 made in ITA.No.2658/Mds/2016 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in estimating the profit for taxation on the entire turnover while impliedly rejecting the audited books of accounts despite the acceptance of the books of accounts by the Respondent/the Assessing Officer except disputed purchases as well as by not recording the requisite satisfaction? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in adopting the report of the income tax inspector to treat the disputed purchases as bogus despite furnishing of the documents at the appellate stage to prove such purchases as 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.101 of 2021 genuine which demonstrated perversity as well as giving their approval for the gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the Doctrine of 'Fair Procedure'? 3. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in not following the principles laid down by this Hon'ble Court on the binding nature of the orders passed by the VAT authorities in so far as the quantum of purchases as well as sales effected in the corresponding period?" 3. We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee submits that the appellant/assessee has already filed the declaration/undertaking under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and is awaiting orders to be passed in Form No.3. 5. In the light of the subsequent event, the Competent Authority 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.101 of 2021 shall process the application/declaration in accordance with the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (Act 3 of 2020) and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. The assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall entertain the prayer without insisting upon any application to be filed for condonation of delay in restoration of the appeal and on such request made by the assessee by filing a miscellaneous petition for restoration, the Registry shall place such petition before the appropriate Division Bench for orders. 6. The tax case appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the substantial questions of law framed are left open. No costs. (T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.) 02.02.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.101 of 2021 To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Chennai. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Tiruppur. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ TCA.No.101 of 2021 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk TCA.No.101 of 2021 02.02.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →