Tax-City 23, Mumbai v. M/S. Thakkar & Associates

:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 13 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 13 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax-City 23, Mumbai ..Appellant versus M/s. Thakkar & Associates ..Respondents Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr. K. Shivram with Mr. A. R. Singh for the Respondents. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI &A.A. KUMBHAKONI, JJ. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & A.A. KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : 10TH JULY, 2008. DATE : 10TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the Appellant on the questions of law framed in the Memo of Appeal. 2. We have gone through the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has passed the order on merits on the controversy and after coming to the conclusion that the Appeal needs to be allowed on merits. 3. In this order the Tribunal has made a reference that in the present case the case was :2: picked up for scrutiny and assessment under Section 143(3). The Tribunal held that the assessment made is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and set aside the assessment. Then again on thorough enquiry the assessment was made. This assessment was again set aside by CIT under Section 263. The Tribunal held such an action on the part of the CIT cannot be permitted unless there were some cogent reasons for that. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Department submits that this finding is wrong and therefore question No.1 is framed accordingly. Basically it is a finding of fact as to whether there was sufficient material produced by the petitioner or not. According to the Tribunal there was material available before the Tribunal to explain the expenditure incurred by way of transport and labour charges. We do not find any question of law involved. Hence, Appeal is dismissed. ( BILAL NAZKI, J. ) :3: (A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J.) (A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J.) (A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J.)