M/S.R.S.RANGA DAS V. THE ASST. COMMISSIOENER OF INCOME TAX

ITTA/320/2005

AI Insights

The case involves M/S.R.S.Ranga Das, Contractors, who appealed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, concerning the assessment year 1997-98. The primary issues in the appeal were the validity of the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the taxability of interest earned on an interim award deposit. The Tribunal had previously decided these issues in favor of the revenue, and the High Court upheld this decision, referencing a similar case involving the same assessee for earlier assessment years.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 691663 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Income chargeable to tax; Income Tax; Interest on Interim Award; Reopening of assessment
• Section: 147; 260A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 320 OF 2005 Appeal Under Section 260 A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 26-04-2005 in ITA No.563 / HYD 12001 ( A.Y. 1997-98) on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench B , Hyderabad preferred against the order dated 22-06-2001 in ITA Nos. 25 & 89 & 88 I DC .2 (2) I CIT (A) -ll, 2000- 2001 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) ll Hyderabad preferred against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax , Circle -2 (21, Hyderabad dated 29-03-2000 in PAN / GIR No. R - 3081 AC .2 (21 Between: M/S.R.S.Ranga Das, Contractors, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND The Asst. Commissioner of lncome tax, Circle 2[2], Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. A. V. A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI J.V. PRASAD (sc FoR rNcoME TAX DEPT) The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT I THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY JUDGMENTi (Per the Hon'bte tte Chief Justice uljat Bhuyan) Heard Mr. A.V.A.Siva Kartikeya, iearned counsel for the appellant and Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Income tax Department appearing for the respondent 2. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee as the appellant under Section 2604' of the Income Tax Act, 196 1 (briefly, 'the Act' hereinafter) assailing the order dated 26.04.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad (Tribunal), ln I.T.A.No.563lHydl2OOL for the assessment year 1997 -98. I I I.T.T.A.No.32O of 2OO5 'l 3. Though the aPPeal was admitted by the order dated 13. L2.2O05, substantial questions of law were not framed. 4. From the appeal memo we find that appellant has proposed the following questions as substantial questions of law: a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in sustaining the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act when entire primary and necessary facts were disclosed at the time of the original assessment? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in holding that the interest earned on the amount deposited in the bank which is received as an interim measure on the directions of the High Court is an income when the arbitration award itself is in dispute and pending adjudication before the High court? 5. From the above, it is seen that as per the first I question, appellant has challenged reopening of I ,l ) I J I I t I assessment under Section 147 of the Act. The second question pertains to u,hether Tribunal was justified in treating the interest earned on the amount deposited in the bank received as interim award as an income, when the arbitration au,ard is pending adjudication. 6. Tribunal in the order dated 26.04.2005 followed its earlier decision rendered on 29.07.2002 in the appeals for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 in the case of the assessee itself. Against the aforesaid order dated 29.07.2OO2, assessee preferred appeal before this Court under Section 260A of the Act, being LT.T.A.No.168 of 20O3. This Court by the order dated 02.O9.2014 held t1at opening of assessment was valid and that interest accrued on interim award deposited in bank was income chargeable to tax. 4 7. Following the above decision, the questions proposed are answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. 8 The present appeal is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPYi/ Sd/.B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR /:- qp SECTION OFFICER To, bs( '1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench B, Hyderabad 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals ) Il Hyderabad 3. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -2 (2), Hyderabad 4. One CC to Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya, Advocate (OPUC) 5. One CC to Sri J.V. Prasad SC for INCOME TAX DEPT [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies p P --'--l- HIGH COURT DATED:21 10912022 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.320 of 2005 DISMISSING THE APPEAL ( ------T z:( o' zl sLa _-,=.-1__\"-. .,.,,- ?* LJ -,) .=3\" .a q :: $ l: "