Itta/283/2018 Of Smt. Pushpa Agarwal v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -Vi

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARAYANA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL Nos: 207 and 283 of 2018 l.T.T.A.No.207 of 2018 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260A of the lncome Tax Act,1961 arising out of the order of the lncome-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench ['A',]Hyderabad, in ITA No.1342lHydl2o14, for Assessment Year 2000-01 dated:21-04-2017 prefened against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax,(Appeals)-18, Mumbai (camp at Hyderabad), Appeal No.ClT(A)-18llTO, W-10(2y0001 & 01 09/ 07-08, dated: 25-03-2014, preferred against the Order of the lncomeTax Officer, Ward-10(2), Range-1O, Hydelabad, P.A.N / G.l.R No.P-776, dated't9-12-2006. Between: Smt. Pushpa Agarwal, Plot.No.22,Road No.S, Trimurthy Cotony, Mahendra Hills,Secunderabad. ...AppellanUAppellant AND The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax-Vl, l.T.Towers, A.C.Guards, MasabTank, Hyderabad. ...RespondenURespondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI C.P. RAMASWAMI Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. J.V. PRASAD, Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the lncome Tax Department l.T.T.A.No.283 ol 2018 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260A of thr_, lncome Tax Act,1961 arising out of the order of the lncome-Tax Appellate [''l-ribunal, ]HyderabadBench 'A', Hyderabad, in ITA No.1341 lHydl2014, for Assessment year 1999-2000dated:21-o4-2ol 7 preferred against the order of the commissicner of lncome Tax ,(Appeals)-18, lr/lumbai (camp at Hyderabad), Appeat No.CtT(,A)-18ltTO, W-j0(2y(Appeals)-18, lr/lumbai (camp at Hyderabad), Appeat No.CtT(,A)-18ltTO, W-j0(2y0001 & 01 09/ 07-08, dated: 25-03-2014, preferred against the r]rder of the lncomeTax Officer, Ward-1012), Range-'10. Hyderabad, p.A.N / G.l.R No.p-776, dated19-12-2006.Tax Officer, Ward-1012), Range-'10. Hyderabad, p.A.N / G.l.R No.p-776, dated19-12-2006. Between: Smt. Pushpa Aganval, Plot.No.22,Road No.S, Trimurthy Colony, Mahendra Hills,Secunderabad. ...AppellanUAppel lant AND The Principal Comrrissioner of lncome Tax-Vl, l.T.Towers, A.rl.Guards, MasabTank, Hyderabad. ...RespondenURespondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI C.p. RAMASWAMI Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. J.V. PRASAD, Learned Senior StandingCounsel for the lncome Tax Department The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIY AI{D THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LA}(MI NARAYANA I.T.T.A. Nos.207 and 283 of 2018 .IUDGMpNI:4xr r I ton'bie 51 .iustlcr: p-SA-LI KOSH4) I{eard Mr C p. I{amasrvamy, learneti Counsel for thc appcllalr andMr-.J.V. Prasad. it:arnc.d Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the lncorneTax Departmenr 2 Upon hearing rlle learlled Counsel for the appellant, particularly lnrcs,cr:t of rh(' conrentiorr raised by him that the learned ITTA as also thcCtrrrr,trssr,rrcr t.,l Irtr.onrc Ta_x Appeals_lg trave not properlv ,porecratcd lhcaflide*';r th,t thc appcllemt had submitted before ther, so far .s rtrcconlrrmation of the Commission paicl and the Commission rcccivcd br, theConrmissrorr ag(,nl ts corrcerncd, we hnd *rat the two forums belou. i.e rht.lezu'ncd ITTA as also rhe Commissioner of Incomc Tax Appeals lE havcclab.s21311 dcalt nith tht: .-,ubject and arrived at thc conclllsron rhat ilr.affitla'it submlttcd r;y ltre comrnission agent does not have surficic.t forcc..\ccr,rdirr g to '.lic tur.rkrrums below, thr:re were various mismarch aldcontradictlons in thc(:ontcntlons submitted by thc appellarrt lvirhthe:rifidavit su bmrtred b)t hc Commission Agent. [.llhe ]assessee also hadn()tt.lk.Jn therc contcntiolrs ol havinq paid the Commissiol to the commissionagor)l irt rhe tifst irrs[i,r(-(] Thr-rs. a, these contentions becomes qucstion orfacts u.hich have br:cn i:xpicsslv deatt with by the said two torllms. 3. In thc gtvcn cir.Lmstarlccs. we arc of the considcred opiniorr thatl.hcIe is lr(, subslanlial rlucstion ol. law worth admitting the lnslan t appcirls and the same therclbrc fails and thcv are accordrngly rejected. No order asto costs 4. Consequentlv, miscellaneous petitions pending, if an1', shall standclosed SD/- B.S.CHIRANJEEVIJOINT REGISTRARSECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The lncome-Tax [,Appellate ][Tribunal, Hyderabad ][Bench ]['A' ][Hyderabad'] 2.TheCommissioneroflncomeTax,(Appeals)-18'MittalCotrrt'NaimanPoint'Mumbai.Mumbai. 3. The lncome [Tax ][Cfficer, ][Ward-10(2)' ][Range-10' ][Hyderaba'J'] 4. One CC to [C.P ][RAMASWAMI, ][Advocate IOPUC]] 5. One CC [to ][Mr. ] [V. PRASAD, ][Sr ][SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT]loPUClloPUCl 6. Two CD [CoPies] Kam BSR d HIGH COURT DATED: 1010812023 JUDGMENT lTTA.Nos.207 and 283 of 2018 THE l.T.T.AsARE REJECTEDa - :'\Afr:,"'-'-_ ,J; I,/ -:''(i'- ''tt.' [-<]I,j\)[i ][''t ][qtP ][2u]"t. [,r]: : .,,t,-\ 7\:\ '1{\-:, il '!-,.., i_,l, " ._