Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/595/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 595 of 2008
=========================================
ASST.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX CIRCLE,NADIAD - Appellant
Versus
PRABHUDAS
P PATEL - Opponent
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR KM PARIKH for Appellant.
None
for Opponent.
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
Date
: 12/08/2008
ORAL ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)
The revenue has filed
this Tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961
proposing to formulate the following substantial question of law :-
Whether the
ITAT was right in law and on facts in holding that the element of
estimation was beyond the scope of block assessment proceedings ?
Mr. K. M. Parikh,
learned Standing Counsel appearing for the revenue has submitted
that despite there was enough evidence collected by the revenue
during the course of search, additions were deleted by the Tribunal.
He has, therefore, submitted that substantial question of law
arises out of the order of the Tribunal. He has further submitted
that in search and seizure proceedings, there is always an element
of estimate and hence, the question proposed by the revenue is
required to be formulated by this Court under Section 260A of the
Income-tax Act, 1961.
We have heard learned
Standing Counsel appearing for the revenue and we have also perused
the orders passed by the authorities below. We are of the view that
the additions were made merely on the basis of estimate. The
Assessing Officer estimated the undisclosed receipts at 42.98% which
was reduced by the CIT (Appeals) at 37%. The Tribunal has examined
the whole issue and come to the conclusion that no material was
brought on record which was seized during search to show that the
assessee has received fees which were not disclosed in the regular
return of more than Rs.28,830/- in assessment years 1993 94 and
rs.1,21,354/- in assessment year 1995 96. The Tribunal has,
therefore, restricted the amount of undisclosed income to the extent
of Rs.28,830/- in the A.Y. 1993-94 and Rs.1,21,354/- in the A.Y.
1995 96. So far as the other assessments are concerned, i.e.
1990 91, 1991 92, 1992 93, 1994 95 and 1996 97,
the Tribunal has observed that no material was found during the
course of search to indicate any suppression of receipts in the
previous years relevant to these assessment years. The Tribunal
has, therefore, come to the conclusion that in absence of any such
material for the aforesaid assessment years, it was beyond the scope
of the block assessments to make addition as undisclosed income only
on the basis of assumption, presumption and surmises.
This being finding of
fact arrived at by the Tribunal after appreciation of evidence, we
are of the view that no question of law, much less any substantial
question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. Hence,
this Tax Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
[K. A. PUJ, J.] [B.
N. MEHTA, J.]
Savariya
Top