Itxa/943/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 v. Dhatrak Construction Company

sbw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.943 OF 2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I ...Appellant Dhatrak Construction Company...Respondent Mr. Vimal Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vipul Arun Bajpayee for the Appellant.Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar for the Respondent. P.C. :- 1]Heard learned counsel Mr. Gupta appearing on behalf of the Revenue. The Revenue is in appeal. The Income Tax Tribunal dismissed its appeal which was directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Nasik, dated 23[rd] February, 2009. The assessment year in question is 2005-06. 2]The only argument was that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deciding the issue of re-opening of assessment under Section 147 and issue of notice under Section 148 on the basis of an incorrect reasoning and against the revenue. sbw 3]We have with the assistance of Shri Gupta perused both the orders. The concurrent finding of fact is that, in the present case the audit of construction trading account stated that in addition to the cost of raw material, direct costs like labour charges, bank and HDFC interest and transportation and water costs are debited to construction trading account and were included in the closing work in progress. The indirect expenses are debited to P & L Account. The Assessing Officer, therefore, relied upon the legal principles and came to a conclusion that this was not a permissible exercise and that is why the Assessing Officer is purported to have exercised his right enabling him re-opening of the assessment. 4]The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and even the Tribunal was justified in holding that these were not grounds enough to form a belief that the income had escaped assessment. The foundation for the proceedings, therefore, was entirely erroneous. Once such findings that are concurrently rendered do not give rise to any substantial question of law, then, the appeal is devoid of any merit and is dismissed. (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) wadhwa