Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax - I vs Alidhara Taxtool Engineers Pvt ... on 3 December, 2012
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sonia Gokani
O/TAXAP/92/2012 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 92 of 2012
================================================================
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I....Appellant(s)
Versus
ALIDHARA TAXTOOL ENGINEERS PVT LTD....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MANAV A MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
3rd December 2012
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
Revenue has filed this Appeal challenging the judgment and order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench [hereinafter referred to as, "the Tribunal"] dated 12th August 2011, raising following substantial questions for our consideration :-
[A] "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the estimation of GP addition when it was proved that production, stock and fixed assets details were not maintained by the assessee ?
[B] "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in considering the figures of raw materials and consumables for justifying the GP downfall, when production details were not maintained by the assessee and books of accounts were already Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Thu Apr 28 02:17:50 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/92/2012 ORDER rejected by the Assessing Officer ?"
[C] "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right, in directing that vatav kasar income should be included in business income for the purpose of calculating deduction u/s. 80IB when such deletion can be allowed only in respect of the income which is derived from 'industrial undertaking' ?"
So far as Questions [A] & [B] are concerned, we noticed that the Tribunal relying on the decision in case of the assessee pertaining to earlier years, deleted the additions. Tribunal held that rejection of the books of accounts is not justified. Essentially, such consideration being on facts, we are inclined to admit such questions.
Counsel for the Revenue was not in a position to point out that the decision of the Tribunal of the earlier years was carried in appeal.
With respect to sole surviving Question [C], counsel submitted that such question has been considered by this Court in Tax Appeal No. 983 of 2009. This Appeal is, therefore, admitted for consideration of Question [C] alone.
To be heard with Tax Appeal No. 983 of 2009.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (Ms. SONIA GOKANI, J.) Prakash* Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Thu Apr 28 02:17:50 IST 2016