Itr/189/1999 Of M/S.p.k.abdul Khadier &Bros v. The Commisioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 ITR.No. 189 of 1999() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN RA.304/COCH//1998 IN I.TA NO.325/COCH/94 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPLICANT(S): -------------- M/S. P.K. AB DUL KHADER & BROS., COCHIN BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE THIS TAX REFERENCE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.R. No. 189 OF 1999 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel appearing for the assessee and senior standingcounsel appearing for the respondent-revenue. In the course of searchin the business premises of the assessee, department noticedunaccounted quantity of barrels purchased. Consequently addition wasmade to the assessment which is equivalent to value of the unaccountedpurchase of barrel taken at Rs. 70/- per barrel. Assessment standssustained in appeals. This reference case is against the penalty leviedunder Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act which is partly confirmed bythe Tribunal. We do not find any question of law arising from theorder of Tribunal, because penalty is levied based on the clear findingof unaccounted purchase and penalty levied is also minimum penaltyunder Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. Even though counsel for theassessee contended that excess stock noticed was covered by bought notes and purchase bills, we do not think we can consider the evidence in reference case. We do not find any ground to deviate from thefinding of the Tribunal, which is based on evidence. We thereforeuphold the order of the Tribunal sustaining minimum penalty andconsequently we answer the question referred against the assessee andin favour of the revenue. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court andsignature of Registrar General shall be forwarded to the Income-taxAppellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (HARUN-UL-RASHID) Judge. kk