Shri Prabhudayal Agarwal V. The Income Officer, War 10 [10], Hyderabad

ITTA/2/2009

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Prabhudayal Agarwal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, which dealt with several income tax assessments for the years 1988-89 to 1991-92. The primary contention was whether the Tribunal erred in fact and law by concluding that the appellant had started a business in computers in 1988-89 and by the method of profit computation on computer sales. The High Court examined whether the Tribunal had overlooked any material or evidence in their decision-making process, which could constitute a 'mistake apparent from the record' under Section 25A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court found that the Tribunal had adequately considered all relevant materials and submissions, and thus, there was no basis to recall or amend the Tribunal's order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 808217 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: Y RATNAKAR
• Keywords: Appellate Tribunal; Computation of profits; Income Tax; Mistake apparent from the record; Business in computers
• Section: 260-A; 25a Q)

Judgement Text

"[ 337s ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI l.T.T.A.No: 2 of 2OO9 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-A of the lncome Tax Act, 196'l arising out of the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B ' Hyderabad, in ITA Nos.504 to 5071Hyd12003, 562 to 565/Hyd/2003 for assessment Year 1988-89 to1991-92 dated 30-05-2008 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), Guntur Camp at Hyderabad, Appeal No.0059/Tr./C|T(A)GNT/2002-03, 0058/Tr./C|T(A)GNT/2002-03, 057/Tr./ClT(A)GNT/2002-03, 0055iTr./ClT(A)cNT/2002-03 dated:30-12-2002, preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle- 5(1 XINV), Hyderabad. PAN/GlR.No.P-745 dated 3 1 -03-'l 999. Between: Shri Prabhudayal Agarwal, Secunderabad ...Appellant AND The lncome Officer, War 10 [10], Hyderabad ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Y. RATNAKAR Counsel forthe Respondent: Ms. P. SAPNA REDDY, SC appearing on behalf of Mr. J.V. PRASAD (sc FOR lT) The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI I.T.T.A.No.2 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT'.(per the Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. Y. Ratnakar, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.P. Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. J.V. trrasad, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax, for the sole respondent. 2. The present is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 assailing the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', at Hyderabad in I.T.A.Nos.5O4 to 5OZ lHyd/2OO3 and I.T.A.Nos.562 to 565/Hyd/2003, dated 30.05.2008 (for short, the impugned order). 3. Vide th-e impugned order, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeals preferred by the respondent, viz., I.T.A.Nos.5O4 to 5O7 /Hyd/2OO3, and simultaneously dismissed the appeals preferred by the assessee, viz., I.T.A.Nos.562, 564 and 565/Hyd/2003, while partly allowing I.T.A.No.563lHyd/Ba, uide order dated 30.05.2008. !-'':' '}1,.': ' 2 4. On 27.07.2009, a Division Bench of this Court admitted the instant appea-l on the following substantial que stion of law, vtz,, 'Whether on the facts and in the circum-stances of the case, the omlbsion to consider mateial on record, submlbsions canuassed, euidence and the case lants cited while disposing of the appeal u.touLd constitute a mistake apparent from the record, uesting junsdiction in the Income Tax Appeltate Tibunal to re- call its order under Section 25a Q) of the Income Tax Act ?' 5. The challenge raised by the appellant in the instant appeal primarily seems to be on the ground that the appellate-Tribunal erroneously concluded that the appellant sta_rted business in computers in 1988-99 whereas there was no such material available before the Tribunal. Likewise, it was also contended by the appellant that computation of profits on sale of computers by the respondent as also by the Tribunal is erroneous and arbitrary. 6. Upon going through the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, what is apparently evident is that the Tribunal had considered these very grounds which the appellant has raised extensively in the grounds of appeal, and the Tribuna_l has decided these issues giving specific reasons while dismissing the appeals preferred by the assessee and partly allowing the appeals filed by the respondent. Therefore, the findings given by the Tribunal appear to be finding on fact. Therefore, u,e are of the considered opinion that the question of law framed by this Court while admitting the appeal has to be answered in the negative, holding that there was in fact no mistake apparent on record committed by the Tribunal while passing the impugned order. 7 . Therefore, the appeal faiis and is accordingly dismissed No costs. 8. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/- C.V. MALLIKARJUNA VARMA //TRUE COPY// JorNrysrRAR SECTION OFFICER To, kam/jak s*- 1 . The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ,B ' Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), Guntur Camp ai Hyderabad. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-S(1)(lNV), HydLrabad. 4. One CC to Mr. Y. RATNAKAR, Advocate tOpUCI 5. One CC to Mr. J.V. PRASAD (SC FOR tT) tOpUCI 6. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:2211112023 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.2 of 2009 DISMISSING OF THE APPEAL q 1$E STAI G. 1 2 rEts 202f o o z a e DF:\"f,.,:i-, % "