Income Tax Case

1 txa53-16-26-06-18 Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEAL NO.53/2016 The Principal CommissionerIncome …...Tax, Panaji.Appellant. V/s. Neelam Ajit Phatarpekar. …... Respondent. Ms. Amira Razaq, Junior Standing Counsel for the Appellant. Mr. H. D. Naik. Advocate for the Respondent. Coram : N.M. Jamdar & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ. Date : 26 June 2018. P.C.: The learned Counsel for the parties point out that TaxAppeal No.56 of 2016, filed against the husband of the presentRespondent which raises the identical questions of facts and law, andarises from the common order passed by the Tribunal, the DivisionBench had disposed of the said Appeal on 28 March 2018, by following order. “The learned counsel for the Respondent has placed onrecord the copy of the order passed by the DivisionBench of this Court on 24 July 2017 in Tax AppealNos.27 and 55 of 2016. Bench of this Court on 24 July 2017 in Tax Appeal 2.We have perused the order dated 24 July 2017. The Tax Appeal Nos.27 and 55 of 216 were dismissed as 2 txa53-16-26-06-18 having been covered by the earlier decision observing thus: “2. The challenge in the above appeals is tothe Order dated 18/06/2015 passed in ITA No.19/PNJ/2014 and the Order dated 14/07/2015 passed in ITANo.66/PNJ/2014, both for the AssessmentYear 2010-11, whereby the appeals preferredby the appellant-Revenue came to bedismissed. The learned Tribunal, whilstdismissing the appeal preferred by theRevenue has relied upon a Judgment of theApex Court in GE India TechnologyCentre Pvt. Ltd., vs. Commissioner ofIncome Tax and anr., 327 ITR 456 wherein it has been conclusively held that tax is liable to be deducted only if the amounts so payable results into any income chargeable to tax in India. The learned Tribunal has also relied upon a decision of its Coordinate Bench in the case of Sesa Goa reported in ITA No.72/PNJ/2012 dated 8th March, 2013 wherein the said proposition has been accepted by the Coordinate Bench. 3.It is not in dispute that the issueinvolved in the above appeals stands also concluded in a Judgment passed by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. V.S.Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd., dated 5thFebruary, 2016. 4. In view of the above, we find that nosubstantial question of law arises in the 3 txa53-16-26-06-18 present appeal for consideration, as theissues involved are no longer res integra” 3.We note that the Appeal No.66 of 2014 which isreferred to in the above mentioned paragraph was part ofthe group before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalalong with the proceedings from which the presentappeal arises. In these circumstances, since the issuehaving been covered in the order dated 24 July 2017, theappeal is dismissed.” 2. The learned Counsel for the parties point out that theorder passed in Tax Appeal No.56 of 2016 as above, covers thepresent appeal as well. Accordingly, Tax Appeal No.53 of 2016 isdisposed of in terms above. Prithviraj K. Chavan, J. N.M. Jamdar, J.