Gujarat High Court High Court

Synpol vs Unknown on 4 August, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Synpol vs Unknown on 4 August, 2008
Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/195320/2006	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 1953 of 2006
 

To


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 1956 of 2006
 

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

 

SYNPOL
PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

DY.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(ASSTT.) - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MRS
SWATI SOPARKAR for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 04/08/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)

The assessee has filed
these four Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 for A.Y. 1992-93 so far as Tax Appeal Nos.1953, 1954 and 1956
of 2006 are concerned and for A.Y. 1993-94 so far as Tax Appeal
No.1955 of 2006 is concerned, proposing to formulate the substantial
questions of law as mentioned in the memo of respective Tax Appeals.

Heard Mr.S.N.Soparkar,
learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mrs.Swati Soparkar for
appellant. Perused the order passed by the authorities below. We
are of the view that all these four Appeals deserve admission.
Hence, the Appeals are admitted in terms of following substantial
questions of law.

(i)
Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the
ITAT was perverse in as much as it has not properly appreciated the
evidences already placed on record and insisted on some hypothetical
and hyper technical evidences to be placed on record ?

(ii) Whether in the facts
and under the circumstances of the case the order of ITAT is perverse
in as much as:

(a) It considers the
material and evidences which are not emanating from the orders of the
authorities below and further erred in considering irrelevant and
extraneous materials ignoring the provisions of law;

(b) It upholds the
conclusion of Assessing Officer on different grounds.

(c) It
misinterprets and misreads the evidences placed on record.

Issue notice to the other
side. Additional paper book, if any, be filed within 3 months from
today.

(K.

A. PUJ, J.) ( B. N. MEHTA, J.)

kks

   

Top