Itta/528/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. Parupati Farms

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. No. 528 of 2013 DATE: 31.10.2013 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),Hyderabad. … Appellant And Parupati FarmsHyderabad. … Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. No. 528 of 2013 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) By the impugned common judgment and order, the learned Tribunalhas disposed of a number of appeals preferred by the Department and otherassesses. However, the Tribunal found that the issue involved in thoseappeals is interlinked with each other. But the revenue has sought to preferthis appeal partially and confined to the following suggested questions of law. “(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order of the Tribunal is not perverse and liableto be set aside? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the transactionof sale of land by the assessee was not an adventure in thenature of trade?” The aforesaid issues have been dealt with by the learned Tribunal atpage No.15 of its judgment in connection with three appeals, namely;ITA.No.1932 to 1934/Hyd/2011 preferred by M/s. Parupati Farms,ITANo.1931/Hyd/2011 preferred by Shri P. Mahender Reddy andITA.No.1995/Hyd/2011 preferred by M/s. Parupati Farms. The learned Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence, found that there isno trading activity and the income derived is from the agriculture lands. Infact, the learned Tribunal has relied on its decision in Mrs. K.Radhika and others in ITA.No.208/Hyd/2011, having found identity of facts and law in thatcase. When the learned Tribunal came to the decision on appreciation ofevidence, this Court cannot re-appreciate the same. Hence, no element oflaw is involved in this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ Date: 31.10.2013ES ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J