Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Satlasana Finlease Pvt Ltd - ... on 1 February, 2010
Author: K.A.Puj
Bench: K.A.Puj, Rajesh H.Shukla
TAXAP/5/2009 1/3 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL No. 5 of 2009
=========================================================
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR - Appellant(s)
Versus
SATLASANA FINLEASE PVT LTD - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Appellant(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) : 1,
=========================================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date : 01/02/2010
ORAL ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad has filed this Tax Appeal under Section-260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2000-01 proposing to formulate the following substantial questions of law for determination and consideration of this Court;
"(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained income even though the assessee had not discharged its HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Jan 16 00:49:10 IST 2016 TAXAP/5/2009 2/3 ORDER onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction ?
(B) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made on account of non business expenditure out of salary expenses even though the directors were not working directors at all and had not done any work of the company ?"
2. Heard Mr. M. R. Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mrs.Mauna M. Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and perused the order passed by the authorities below. The Tribunal while deleting the addition has referred to its own order in the case of DCIT Vs. Superstar Amusement Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.181/Ahd/2007 decided n 12.3.2007. Mr.Bhatt has pointed out that against the said decision the Revenue has preferred Tax Appeal No.1552 of 2007 and the said Tax Appeal has been admitted by this Court vide its order dated HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Jan 16 00:49:10 IST 2016 TAXAP/5/2009 3/3 ORDER 8.4.2008. He has, therefore, submitted that the present Tax Appeal is also required to be admitted.
3. So far as question No.2 is concerned, it is based on finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal and hence it cannot be said that the same will be considered as the substantial question of law.
4. In the above view of the matter, we admit this Tax Appeal and formulate the question No.(A) referred to hereinabove as substantial question of law only.
5. Notice to the other side.
6. Additional paper book, if any, be filed within three months.
To be heard with Tax Appeal No.1552 of 2007.
(K. A. PUJ, J.) (R. H. SHUKLA, J.) kks HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Jan 16 00:49:10 IST 2016