THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI RAJKUMAR SADHWANI

PDF · subscribers
ITA/415/2007HC KarnatakaKAHC01030756200725 November 2013Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal, following its decision in a similar matter. The court found no substantial questions of law to be formulated and upheld the ITAT's order.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that confirmed the lower appellate authority's decision. The ITAT held that the income shown in the assessee's return did not constitute undisclosed income, and no search had taken place.

What were the issues?

Whether the income declared by the assessee constituted undisclosed income and if the ITAT's order was sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- - - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.415 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.

2.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax,

Circle – 1(1),

C.R. Building,

Queens Road,

Bangalore.

.. APPELLANTS

(By Sri. K.V. Aravind & Sri B. Pramod, Advs.)

AND:

Shri. Rajkumar Sadhwani, No.67/1, Sadhwani Mansion, Lavelle Road, Bangalore .

.. RESPONDENT

(By Sri A. Shankar & Sri M. Lava, Advs.)

This Appeal is filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 22-12-2006 passed in IT(SS)A 79/Bang/2004 for the Block Assessment Year 1988-89 to 1998-99, praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to;

- - - 2 - i. formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein,

ii. allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in IT(SS)A 79/Bang/2004 dated 22-12- 2006 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Asst., Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bangalore, in the interest of justice and equity.

This Appeal coming on for hearing this day, KUMAR J., delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue, challenging the order passed by the Tribunal as well as the Lower Appellate Authority in holding that the income shown in the return of the assessee does not constitute undisclosed income.

2.

It is relevant to note that no search has taken place in the hands of the respondent – assessee. However, this Court by even order dated 25th November 2013 has dismissed a similar matter in I.T.A.No.414/2007. In view of the same, this appeal is also dismissed in the terms stated in I.T.A.No.414/2007.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE KNM/-

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →