Ita/1577/2009 Of Tax Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Tvpm v. Dr.v.k.jayakumar, Anchal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 ITA.No. 1577 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.142/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT ----------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- DR.V.K.JAYAKUMAR, ANCHAL, KOLLAM. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard senior standing counsel appearing for the revenue whichhas filed this appeal against the order of the Tribunal. After hearingsenior counsel and after going through the orders of the Tribunal, wedo not find any substantial question of law justifying interference by uswith the Tribunal's order in an appeal under Section 260A of the I.T.Act which provides for High Court's interference with orders ofTribunal only when substantial question of law arises. The respondentis a doctor running a hospital and the dispute pertains to estimation ofincome based on materials gathered on inspection. The first appellateauthority as well as the Tribunal modified the assessment pertaining tovarious additions and estimation of income from hospital. Thecontention of the revenue is that income fixed at 11% of the suppressedcollection is too low. In fact the department itself has estimated theincome and so much so the option to the Tribunal is to estimate income by themselves if the income fixed by the department is found to behigh. The Tribunal has followed the percentage of income from adecision of the Bombay High Court which also relates to the incomefrom a hospital run by a doctor, which is the case herein also. We donot find anything wrong in the Tribunal adopting the percentage ofincome fixed by the Bombay High court in respect of a hospital run bya doctor. Since no substantial question of law arises on these findings,we dismiss the appeal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk