Ita v. Mridula

IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.218 of2011 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana…Appellant Versus M/s Davinder Sandhu Impex Ltd., Ludhiana…Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTAHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIAPresent:Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant-revenue.HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 aggrieved against an order passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘A’, Chandigarh (for short ‘theTribunal’) on 12.10.2010 in respect of the block period 01.04.1996 to05.02.2003. The Tribunal has relied upon an order passed by this Court inITA No.591 of 2009 titled ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana Vs. Mridula, Prop. M/s Dhruv Fabrics, Ludhiana’ (decided on 20.07.2010). The Revenue has claimed the following substantial question oflaw, as arisen from the order of the Tribunal: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITATwas right in law in holding that the assumption of jurisdiction underSection 158BD of the I.T. Act by the A.O. was not valid as the satisfactionwas recorded by the A.O. of the person searched after framing the blockassessment under Section 158BC in the case of that person?” Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the question oflaw as raised by the Revenue stands concluded against the Revenue by thejudgment of this Court in ITA No.591 of 2009 titled ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana Vs. Mridula, Prop. M/s Dhruv Fabrics,Ludhiana’ (decided on 20.07.2010). In view of the above, we do not find that any question of lawarises for consideration by this Court. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA)JUDGE 22.11.2011Vimal (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE