Dismissed

Commissioner of Income TAX-21 v. M/S Sai Shiv Developers

Bombay HC14 Dec 2015ITXA/1852/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court dismissed the Income Tax Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax-21 against an order of the Tribunal. The court held that the substantial questions of law raised were already conclusively answered against the Revenue by a concurrent judgment of the same court on a different appeal against the same assessee of the same period.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs.

Commissioner of Income TAX-21 Vs M/S Sai Shiv… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1852-14-itxa=.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1852 OF 2014

¶4

Commissioner of Income Tax-21

¶5

.. Appellant

¶6

v/s.

¶7

M/s. Sai Shiv Developers ..Respondent

¶8

Mr. Ashok Kotangale i/b Ms. Padma Divakar for the appellant Mr. Subhash S. Shetty a/w D.C. Jain for the respondent

¶9

CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & G.S. KULKARNI, J.J. DATED : 14^th DECEMBER, 2015.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,

¶12

1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 28^th March, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order of the Tribunal relates to Assessment Year 2006-07.

¶13

This appeal raises the following substantial questions of law

¶14

for our consideration :-

1 of 3

Uday S. Jagtap

1852-14-itxa=.doc

(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue and holding the same to be infructuous, without considering the fact that the Revenue has not accepted the Tribunal's order dated 23.05.2012 setting aside the order u/s 263 and has filed an appeal u/s 260A for A.Y. 2006-07 vide ITXA No.211/2013 which is pending and hence not reached finality?

¶19

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue and holding the same to be infructuous without discussing the issue of deemed dividend?”

¶20

It is an agreed position between the parties that both the questions stand concluded against the Revenue by the decision of this Court, rendered on 27^th January, 2015 in Income Tax Appeal No.210 of 2013 filed by the Revenue against the same Respondent Assessee. The above Income Tax Appeal No.210 of 2013 was filed from the order dated 23^rd May, 2012 of the Tribunal for Assessment Year 2005-06 holding that Commissioner of Income Tax has no jurisdiction to exercise powers of Revision under

2 of 3

Uday S. Jagtap

1852-14-itxa=.doc

Section 263 of the Act and also that on merits no issue of deemed dividend arises. The present appeal emanates for the orders passed in appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on merits.

¶25

Consequently, the questions as framed above do not give rise

¶26

to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained.

¶27

Hence, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶28

(G.S. KULKARNI, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)

¶29

3 of 3

¶30

Uday S. Jagtap

Commissioner of Income TAX-21 v. M/S Sai Shiv Developers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income TAX-21 v. M/S Sai Shiv Developers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharti Jaiprakash Gajaria Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (International TRANSACTION)-2(3)(1) and 2 Ors.

Mrs. Bharti Jaiprakash Gajaria Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Transaction) and 2 Ors.

The Commissioner of Income Tax I, Pune Vs Bank of Maharashtra, Lokmangal

Commissioner of Income TAX-21 Vs M/S Sai Shiv Developers

The Commissioner of Income Tax-Iii Vs Bhavesh C.Mehta

The Commissioner of Income Tax -Iii, Pune Vs Shri Shriram Hiralal Soni