Gujarat High Court
Pri. Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Kunvarji Commodities Brokers ... on 2 November, 2015
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani, A.G.Uraizee
O/TAXAP/609/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO.609 of 2015
=============================================
PRI. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1....Appellant(s)
Versus
M/S KUNVARJI COMMODITIES BROKERS PVT.LTD.....Opponent(s)
=============================================
Appearance:
MR MR BHATT, SR. ADVOCATE with MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE
for the Appellant(s) No.1
MR SN SOPARKAR, SR. ADVOCATE with MR BS SOPARKAR, CAVEATOR
for the Opponent(s) No.1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
Date : 02/11/2015
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the appellant - revenue has challenged the order dated 19th March, 2015 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "A" (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in IT(SS)A No.680/Ahd/2010 by proposing the following two questions:-
[A] "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law in deleting the addition without appreciating full facts of the case elaborately dealt with by the Assessing Officer and thereby the order of the Appellate Tribunal is perverse?"
[B] "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law in not appreciating that the disclosure of undisclosed income u/s 132(4) of the Act made Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Wed Nov 04 02:13:06 IST 2015 O/TAXAP/609/2015 ORDER voluntarily and without any element of coercion could not be retracted without cogent evidence?"
2. The assessment year is 2008-09 and the corresponding accounting period is the previous year 2007-08.
3. Heard Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned senior advocate with Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned senior advocate with Mr. B.S. Soparkar, learned advocate for the respondent.
4. It is an admitted position that the questions involved in the present case are similar to the questions involved in Tax Appeal No.610/2015. By an order dated 6th October, 2015 made in Tax Appeal No.610/2015 in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax v. M/s. Kunvarji Finance Private Limited, proposed question [B] came to be rejected. Proposed question [A] merely relates to proposed question [B]. Under the circumstances, for the reasons stated in the order dated 6th October, 2015 made in Tax Appeal No.610/2015, it is not possible to state that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial question of law so as to warrant interference. The appeal, therefore, fails and is accordingly summarily dismissed.
( Harsha Devani, J. ) ( A.G. Uraizee, J. ) hki Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Wed Nov 04 02:13:06 IST 2015