Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Jharkhand High Court

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Amit Ahuja Proprietor M/S Unio on 8 July, 2011

Author: Prakash Tatia

Bench: P.P. Bhatt, Prakash Tatia

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.
                         Tax Appeal No. 48 of 2010
                                 with
                         I.A. No. 1373 of 2011
                                         ...
           The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamshedpur... ...                 Appellant
                                 -V e r s u s-
           Amit Ahuja                                    ...       ...     Respondent.
                                         ...
CORAM: - HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT.
                                         ...
           For the Appellant             : - Mr. Deepak Roshan, Advocate.
                                         ...
           Order No. 05                                 Dated 08th July, 2011

...

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties on the point of limitation.

The delay in filing this Appeal is condoned.

I.A. No. 1373 of 2011 stands disposed of.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties on the merit of this case.

3. The assessee preferred the appeal against the order of the C.I.T., Jamshedpur, dated 10th February, 2009, passed under Section 263 of the I.T. Act for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee's appeal was allowed by the I.T.A.T., Ranchi Circuit Bench, Ranchi vide order dated 12th February, 2010. Hence this appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

4. The learned I.T.A.T., Ranchi has observed that the assessment record shows that the assessee during the year has raised fresh unsecured loans of Rs.20,42,649/- as these loans have been prima facie raised from close relatives of the assessee, which according to the I.T.A.T., were apparently covered under Section 40 (a) (2) (b) of the Act. The I.T.A.T. also further observed that though the Assessing Officer had called for the details of these loans and obtained the confirmation of the creditors, their Permanent Account Numbers, copies of returns of their income for the relevant assessment years and the Bank accounts from which loans have been advanced. The learned I.T.A.T. was right in observing that in spite of availability of all these informations from the assessee, no further investigation was conducted, then there were no reasons for not relying upon the transaction process. The above facts disclose that the matter has been decided on the basis of the fact situation and in this Tax Appeal, no question of law arises. Hence, this Tax Appeal is dismissed.

(Prakash Tatia, A.C.J) (P.P. Bhatt, J.) APK/Anu