0% found this document useful (0 votes)
19 views3 pages

Calcutta High Court Ruling in An Income Tax Matter

Uploaded by

samyak.learn
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
19 views3 pages

Calcutta High Court Ruling in An Income Tax Matter

Uploaded by

samyak.learn
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

OD-19

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA


Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax)
ORIGINAL SIDE

ITAT/41/2024
IA NO: GA/2/2024

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA


Vs
ATLANTIC DEALERS PVT. LTD.

BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Date : 3rd May, 2024.


Appearance:
Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.
Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv.
…for the appellant

Mr. Sourav Chunder, Adv.


Ms. Mandobi Chowdhury, Adv.
…for the respondent

The Court: This appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) against the order dated 8th May, 2023 passed

by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A.

No.530/Kol/2020 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for

consideration:-

(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata has erred in granting relief to

the assessee/respondent and set aside the Ld. Commissioner of


2

Income Tax (Appeals)’s order on account of addition on undisclosed

cash credit u/s. 68 of Rs. 14,78,00,000/- for the Assessment Year

2009-10, though the assessee/respondent has failed to prove the

genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the subscribers ?

(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata is justified to set aside the

order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in ignoring the facts

that the creditworthiness of the subscribing companies were not

established before the Assessing Officer during the course of the

assessment proceedings though the onus of proving the identity of the

creditor vests solely with the assessee/respondent?

We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned counsel along with Mr. Prithu

Dudhoria, learned standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sourav Chunder,

learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent.

The short question which falls for consideration in the instant case is

whether the addition made under Section 68 of the Act was justified. The

learned Tribunal has done an elaborate examination of the factual matrix

which ought to have been done by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

when the appeal was decided.

We find from the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals) dated 28th July, 2017 none of the grounds raised by the assessee was

considered and it is totally a non-speaking order without application of mind.


3

However, the learned Tribunal has examined the facts produced by the

assessee not before the Tribunal for the first time but the facts which were

already placed before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted that the

Assessing Officer did not comment upon the veracity or the admissibility of any

of the details or documents produced by the assessee to prove the identity, the

creditworthiness of the share subscribers and the genuineness of the

transaction. It appears that only because the directors failed to respond to the

notices issued, the Assessing Officer drew an adverse inference. This the

learned Tribunal on facts found to be unjustified. Thus, we find that there is no

question of law much less substantial question of law arising for consideration

in this appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed.

Consequently, the application stands closed.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.)

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

bp/R.Bhar

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy