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 0, Cited by 2]

Jharkhand High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Pato Builders Pvt., M.P. C on 30 November, 2012

Author: Prakash Tatia

Bench: Chief Justice, Jaya Roy

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            Tax Appeal No.01 of 2012

         The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamshedpur,
         Singhbhum East                       ... ...     Appellant
                            Vrs.
         M/s PATO Builders Pvt. Ltd, Jamshedpur       ...... Respondent
                                            ------

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY

------

For the Appellant: M/s Deepak Roshan, Sr. S.C.(Revenue) Ms. Rupa Kumari, Adv.

For the Respondent: M/s P. Poddar, Adv.

Ms. Amrita Sinha, Adv.

------

Order No.10 Dated 30th November, 2012.

The following questions of law are involved in this appeal:

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. I.T.A.T. Was justified deleting the entire additions made by the AO which was based on incriminating documents found during survey?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. Tribunal was justified in law in impliedly deleting the disallowance made under section 40 (a)(ia) for the failure to deduct tax at source on fee?
3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the definition of 'books of account' in section 2(12A) of the Act is an inclusive one?
4. Whether the ld. Tribunal was justified in law to impliedly uphold the deletion of disallowance under section 40A(3) by ignoring that no books were maintained and that the disallowance is liable to be made even in cases of profit estimation?
5. Whether the ld. Tribunal has misdirected himself in law to impliedly uphold the deletion of net profit of Rs.9,51,535/-

including its restriction to Rs.2,00,000/- by ld. CIT(A) ignoring that no books of account or supporting evidences were produced before the assessment proceeding and on relying on the past performance?

Admit.

No need to issue notice to the respondent as respondent have put in appearance.

(Prakash Tatia,C.J.) (Jaya Roy, J.) Sudhir