PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, V. SHRI MANOHAR LAL CHUGH

ITA/27/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, as the appellant, contesting against Shri Manohar Lal Chugh, the respondent. The core of the dispute revolves around the interpretation and application of tax laws as adjudicated by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appellant conceded that the issues were previously addressed in similar cases (D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.54/2021 and No.60/2021), where the ITAT's decisions were upheld by the court. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Designated Authority, emphasizing that unless there is a substantial question of law or a gross violation of natural justice, the tribunal's decision should stand if it is a possible conclusion based on the facts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 719431 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-10-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I Vs. Ritu Agarwal, Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I Vs. Ajay Agarwal, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, Jaipur Vs. Shri Sanjay Chhabra
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ROHAN CHATTAR; SATWIKA JHA
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP PATHAK; JAYA PATHAK
• Keywords: Income tax appeal; ITAT; Natural Justice; Substantial question of law
• Section: 260A

Judgement Text

"[2023:RJ-JP:27242-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 27/2023 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur (Raj.-302005) ----Appellant Versus Shri Manohar Lal Chugh, C 260 Hans Marg Malviya Nagar Jaipur (Rajasthan.) ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak with Ms. Jaya Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohan Chattar & Ms. Satwika Jha for Mr. Siddharth Ranka HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 06/10/2023 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has conceded before the Court that the matter under consideration involving same controversy was decided by way of D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.54/2021-Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I Vs. Ritu Agarwal & D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.60/2021-Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I Vs. Ajay Agarwal, vide order dated 10.05.2022, wherein it was observed as follows:- \"6. On perusal of the order of learned ITAT and reasonings given therein this court is of the view that the substantial questions of law, formulated above does not arise as learned ITAT has logically dealt [2023:RJ-JP:27242-DB] (2 of 3) [ITA-27/2023] questions of fact and law involved by way of reasoned order. 7. Placing reliance upon the Apex Court judgment of Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Designated Authority, Directorate General of Anit Dumping &Allied Duties and Ors.:2017 (349) E.L.T 193 (SC), wherein the question of admission of an appeal, on substantial question of law was considered and it was held as under:- “(i) The question raised must involve a substantial question of law which has not been answered or, on which, there is a conflict of decisions necessitating are solution. (ii) If the Tribunal, on consideration of the material and relevant facts, had arrived at a conclusion which is a possible conclusion, the same must be allowed to rest even if this Court is inclined to take another view of the matter. (iii) The Tribunal had acted in gross violation of the procedure or principles of natural justice occasioning a failure of justice.\" 8.We are of the view that learned ITAT has passed the order on consideration of material and relevant facts, logical conclusion has been arrived at and the same must be allowed to rest. There is no gross violation of principles of natural justice or failure of justice, no error has crept in the order impugned of learned ITAT. The Coordinate Bench of this court in D. B. IT Appeal No.22/2021 titled as Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, Jaipur Vs. Shri Sanjay Chhabra, in the similar facts and circumstances has already taken a view that in the appeal at hand under Section 260A of the Act no substantial question of law arises. 9. In the light of above discussions, the present appeal under Section 260A of the Act does not call for interference and is hereby dismissed as no substantial question of law arises worth consideration.\" 2. Learned counsel has submitted that the Revenue has filed a Special Leave Petition, though no stay/interim protection/order has been passed therein. [2023:RJ-JP:27242-DB] (3 of 3) [ITA-27/2023] 3. Considering the said submissions, we dismiss the Income Tax Appeal in light of the judgments in Ritu Agarwal(supra) and Ajay Agarwal(supra) in same terms against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH),CJ Anil Sharma/ Pooja /56 "