Gujarat High Court High Court

Commissioner vs Mr on 23 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Mr on 23 March, 2010
Author: D.A.Mehta,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/70/2009	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 70 of 2009
 

 
=========================================================


 

COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX-I - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

PRAKASH
METAL INDUSTRIES - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
M.R.BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MRS MAUNA M BHATT
for Appellant(s) : 1.
 

MR
S.N.SOPARKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MRS. SWATI SOPARKAR AND MS BHOOMI
THAKORE, ADVOCATES for Respondent. 
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for
Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
		
	

 

Date
: 23/03/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)

1. In
this Appeal the Appellant Revenue has proposed the following question
stated to arise out of order made on 10.4.2008 by Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ‘A’ in Appeal filed by the
Revenue.

Whether the Appellate
Tribunal is right in law and on facts in not adjudicating the grounds
in the revenues appeal, on the ground that it had cancelled the block
assessment in the appeal preferred by the assessee ?

2. The
Tribunal in its impugned order has cancelled assessment for the block
period on the ground that in absence of Notice under section
143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the assessment cannot be upheld
and hence the Tribunal has not gone into the merits of various issues
raised in the Appeal filed by the Revenue in the Tribunal.

3. As
recorded in order of even date made in Tax Appeal No. 69 of 2009
between the same parties, there is no error committed by the
Tribunal in cancelling the assessment and, therefore, once the
assessment does not stand it is not possible to state that the
Tribunal has committed any error in law in not dealing with the other
grounds raised in Revenue’s Appeal on merits.

4. Accordingly,
in absence of any question of law, much less a substantial question
of law, the Appeal is dismissed.

(D.A.

Mehta, J.) (H.N. Devani, J.)

M.M.BHATT

   

Top