Sunil Kumar Ahuja vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/134/2023HC TelanganaHBHC01043076202330 October 2023Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY5 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the grounds of challenge in the present appeals primarily relate to findings of fact. The Court found no substantial question of law, nor any question of law, that arose from the concurrent findings of the lower authorities (Assessing Officer, CIT(A), and ITAT). The Tribunal had extensively dealt with the submissions made by the appellant concerning agriculture income and rental income, and its finding that the assessing officer's conclusion was reasonable and based on adduced materials was considered by the Court. Therefore, the appeals were rejected. No specific issue was left undecided; the Court found no merit in the appeals as presented.

What were the facts?

These are two Income Tax Tribunal Appeals (ITTAs) filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by Sunil Kumar Ahuja (the appellant/assessee) against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'A'. The appeals pertain to Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09 (ITA No.156/Hyd/2022) and AY 2009-10 (ITA No.157/Hyd/2022). The ITAT orders were dated April 25, 2023, and March 27, 2023, respectively. These orders were preferred against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Hyderabad, which in turn confirmed the orders of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Hyderabad, dated December 30, 2010. The dispute involves the findings of the assessing officer regarding agriculture income and rental income, which were upheld by the appellate authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court can entertain the present appeals as substantial questions of law arise from the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, particularly concerning the findings on agriculture income and rental income (mixed question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation and application of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through their counsel, argued before the Tribunal on the issues of agriculture income and rental income. The High Court, in its judgment, notes that the Tribunal extensively dealt with these submissions. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not explicitly record any separate contentions made by the revenue before the High Court. However, the revenue was represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Hyderabad, as the respondent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[ 3386 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETW t.T.T.A.Nos: 134 and 136 of 2023 l.T.T.A.No.134 of 2023 lncome Tex Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad in ITA No.156/H ydl2o22, for Assessment Year 2008-09 daled 25-04' 2023 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, Appeal No.1008012019-2O daled 28-02-2022 preferred against the Order of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax Central Circle-1, Hyderabad, PAN/GIR No. ABLPA2822L dated 30-12-2010. Between: Sunil Kumar Ahuja, Aged 54 years, Occ- Business, R/o H.No-6-3-596/72, Naveen Nagar, Behind Taj Krishna, Hyderabad (PAN-ABLPA2822L) ...APPELLANT AND Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI P.S.S. KAILASH NATH Counsel for the ResPondent: ---'-

l.T.T.A.No.136 of 2023 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260,4 of the lncome Tax Act, '1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'A', Hyderabad jn ITA No.157lHydl2O22, for Assessment Year 2009-1C dated 27-03- 2023 Vefefied against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, Appeal No.1008112019-20 dated 28-02-2022 preferted against the Order of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax Central Circle-1, Hyderabad, PAN/GlR No ABLPA2B22L dated 30-12-2010. Between: Sunil Kumar Ahuja, Aged 54 years, Occ- Business, R/o H.No.6-3-596/72, Naveen Nagar, Behind Taj Krishna, Hyderabad (PAN-ABLPA2822L) ...APPELLANT AND Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI P.S.S. KAILASH NATH Counsel for the Respondent: --------- The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT i I I I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE, P.SAM KOSHY AND THE IION'BLE SRJ JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA AI-ISHETIY l.T.T.A.Nos.l34 and 136 of 2023 COMMON JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.Kailash Nath P.S.S., learned counsel for thc appellant in both these appeals and perused the rnaterial available on record 2. The challenge in these appeals is to the orders passed by the lncomc Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, bench 'A' Il1'derabad in I.T.A.No.l56iHYD/2022 for the assessment year 2008-2009, dated 25.04.2023 and I.T.A.No.157lHYDl2022 lbr the assesstncnt year 2009- 201 0. dated 27.03.2023. 3. Upon due consideration ol the subrnissions ntade by the learned counsel for the appellant, more particularly, so fat' as the finding of the 'fribunal on the agriculture income and also so far as the claim of rental income is concerned, we find that the Tribunal has extensively dealt with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and have found that the finding given by the assessing officer to be reasonable and based on the materials that were adduced before the assessing officer. The finding of the assessing officer was also considered by the Commissioner Appeals and theleafter, by the Income Tax Appellate Tribuna[.

2 4. In vierv ol the samc, thc grounds of challenge in the pr.escnt [.'l'.'l'.r\s., becontes the finding of facts and we do trnd ant, substantial cluestion of larv, much less a question of law made out in the teeth of tlie concurent finding given b1, the aLrthorities concerncd. 5 I'hus, these Appeals lails and are accordingly r.ejected. 6 Consecluently, missellaneous petitions pending, if any. shall stand closed Sd/. B.S. CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1 . The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-1 1, Hyderabad. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-l, Hyderabad 4. One CC to SRI P.S.S. KAILASH NATH, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies 6D To, kam \ Y

HIGH COURT DATED:3011012023 COMMON JUDGMENT lTTA.No.134 and 136 of 2023 THESE APPEALS ARE REJECTED "19 .,4 DJ\ 1$E SrAf€' ( q t- ? d v N0il z02l o .L * I)Fa i I l l I I I I I .'t't l,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →