PRKAASH NARAYANDAS RIZWANI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AURANGABAD AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
TA/114/2008HC BombayHCBM03019163200815 February 2012Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.B.DESHMUKH,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE D. G. KARNIK2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the facts in the present appeal, Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008, were identical to those in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, with the exception of the assessment year and the amount of commission. Consequently, for the reasons already recorded in the speaking order passed on the same day in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, the present appeal was also dismissed summarily. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with identical facts and issues, where a decision has already been rendered on those facts and issues, will follow the same fate. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Shri Prakash Narayandas Rizwani, filed Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. The appeal was against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Aurangabad, and the Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Cir. 3(2), Nanded, and the Income-tax Officer, Ward 3(6), Nanded. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the facts in this appeal are identical to those in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, with the only differences being the assessment year and the amount of commission in dispute. The appeal was filed by the original assessee against the original respondents.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the facts of Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008 were identical to those in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, and if so, whether the same reasoning and outcome should apply. The appellant, through their counsel, contended that the facts were identical, differing only in the assessment year and the quantum of commission. The revenue did not present any specific arguments as the appeal was dismissed summarily based on the appellant's submission regarding the identical nature of facts with previous appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

(1) Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008 Shri Prakash Narayandas Rizwani, .. Appellant R/o. 37, Bhagyanagar, Nanded. (Original assessee) versus 1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Aurangabad, Pune Road, Aurangabad. 2. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, .. Respondents Cir. 3(2), Nanded. (Original respondents) 3. Income-tax Officer, Ward 3(6), Nanded. ....................... Mr. M.K. Kulkarni, Advocate, with Mr. R.R. Chandak, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General, for respondent nos.1 to 3. ........................

(2) Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2008 CORAM : D.G. KARNIK & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 15TH FEBRUARY 2012 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Learned Counsel for the appellant states that the facts in this appeal are identical with the facts in Tax Appeal Nos. 70/2007 and 73/2007, except that the present Appeal relates to the different assessment year and different amount of commission. 2. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the speaking order passed today in Tax Appeal No. 70/2007 and 73/2007, present Appeal is also dismissed summarily.

( S.B. DESHMUKH ) ( D.G. KARNIK ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/ta114

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →