Shri Prabhudayal Agarwal V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(10), Hyderabad

ITTA/5/2009

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 appeals concerning the assessment years 1988-89 to 1991-92. The Tribunal's decision included findings on the commencement of Agarwal's computer business and the computation of profits from computer sales, which were contested by Agarwal. The High Court's review focused on whether the Tribunal had made a mistake apparent from the record in its decision, particularly regarding the factual basis of its findings. The court concluded that the Tribunal had adequately considered the issues raised and had not erred in its factual determinations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797057 (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; Business in computers; Computation of profits; Income Tax; Mistake apparent from the record
• Section: 254(2); 260-A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY,THE TWENW SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'ABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: s oF 2009 lncome Tax Tribunar Appear Under section 2604 of ttre rncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the rncome-Tax Appelate Trbunar, Hyderabad Bench , 8 , Hyderabad, in ITA Nos. S06/Hyd/2003 and assessment Year 1988-Bg to 1991-92 dated ITA Nos. 30-05-2008 SMl Hydl 2003 for preferred against ttre order of the commissioner of rncome Tax, ( Appears ) Guntur (camp at Hyderabad) in Appeal Nos.0059/ Tr.c rr (A) GNT. No.04s4lcrr(A)- 1 o t2o1 s-1 6, dated:.r 0-02-20 16, preferred against the order of the rncome Tax officer, ward-g(2), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.AHGPR666BG, dated 2B-1 1 -201 1. Between: Shri Prabhudayal Agarwal, Secunderabad ...APPELLANT AND The lncometax Officer, Ward i0 (10) , Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counse! for the Appellant: SRl y. RATNAKAR Counsel for the Respondent : Ms. p. SAPNA REDDY SC ON BEHALF OF SRI J.V. PRASAD, S.C. for lncome Tax Dept. The Court made the following JUDGMENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRJ JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI I.T.T.A.No.5 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT:(per the Hon'ble Sri Justtce P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. Y. Ratnakar, learned counsel for the appellalt and Ms.P. Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax, for the sole respondent. 2. The present is an appeal liled 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.504 to 507/Hyd l2OO3 and LT.A.Nos.562 to 565/Hyd/2003, dated 30.o5.2oo8 (for short, 'the impugned order). 3. Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal partly atlowed the appeals preferred by the respondent, viz., I.T.A.Nos.504 to 5O7 /Hyd/2OO3, and simultaneously dismissed the appeals preferred by the assessee, viz., LT.A.Nos.562, 564 and 565/Hyd/2OO3, while partly allowing I.T.A.No.563lHydlC3a, uide order dated 3O.O5,2008. 2 4. On 27.07.2009, a Division Bench of this Court admitted the instant appeal on the following substantial question of law, vtz. , \"Whether on the facts and in the ciratmstances of tle case, the omission to consider mateial on record' submissions canuassed., euidence and the case lortts cited uthite disposing of the appeal u-tould constitute o mi.stoke apparent from the record, uesting jurisdiction in the Income Tox Appellate Tribunal to re' call its ord.er und.er Section 254 (2) 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 started the 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 pro{its 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 Tribuna'l had considered these very grounds which the appellant has raised extensively in the Grounds of Appeal, and the Tribunal has decided these issues giving specific reasons while dismissing the appeals preferred by the assessee and partly allowing the 3 appeals hled by the respondent. Therefore, the findings given by the Tribunal appear to be finding on fact. Therefore, we 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 fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. 8. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. B.S. CHIRANJEEVI ./ JOINT REGISTRAR v. SECTION OFFICER To kul VH 1. The lncome-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ,B , Hyderabad (with records, if any) 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax, ( Appeals ) Guntur CAMp at Hvderabad 3. The Assistant commissioner of tnidmb'Tax, circte_S 1tf1tf.to, Hvo'eii'oao - 4. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-10(10). Hvderabad 5. One CC to SRl. Y. RATNAKAR. Aavocaie tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRt. J.V. PRASAD, S.C. for lT Eiepartmient [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies rP- , HIGH COURT DATED:2211112O23 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.5 of 2009 DISMISSING THE ITTA W1THOUT COSTS rtrEST416 4 o r.) 3 o rEC 2023 :t) * ,-() I o(ts p.^J (-,'. t I e#ffi', "