The Lncome Tax Officer, Ward 10 [10], Hyderabad v. Prasad(Sc For Lncome Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENryTHREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 1 OF 2009 (Incorne Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench "B"Hyderabad in ITA No. 504 TO 501 / Hyd./ 2003 and ITA Nos. 562 to 565 / Hyd/2003 dated 30-05-2008 for assessment years 1988-89 to l99l -92 preferred againstthe Commissioner of [ncome Tax -III, Hyderabad ( Appeals) , Guntur , CAMP atHyderabad dated 30/12/2022 rn Appeal. Nos. 0059/ Tr./CIT (A) GNT/2002-03,0058/Tr. / CIT (A) / GNT /2002-03,0057tTr.tCIT [(A) ]GNT/ 2002-03 I 0055/Tr. /CIT(A) GNT/2002-03 preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, Circle -5 (l ), (INV) Hyderabad in PAN/GIR No. P- 745, dated 3 l-03-1999.1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench "B"Hyderabad in ITA No. 504 TO 501 / Hyd./ 2003 and ITA Nos. 562 to 565 / Hyd/2003 dated 30-05-2008 for assessment years 1988-89 to l99l -92 preferred againstthe Commissioner of [ncome Tax -III, Hyderabad ( Appeals) , Guntur , CAMP atHyderabad dated 30/12/2022 rn Appeal. Nos. 0059/ Tr./CIT (A) GNT/2002-03,0058/Tr. / CIT (A) / GNT /2002-03,0057tTr.tCIT [(A) ]GNT/ 2002-03 I 0055/Tr. /CIT(A) GNT/2002-03 preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, Circle -5 (l ), (INV) Hyderabad in PAN/GIR No. P- 745, dated 3 l-03-1999. Between: Shri Prabhudayal Aganaral, Secunderabad. AND The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 10 [10], Hyderabad ...APPELLANT Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. Y. RATNAKARCounsel for the Respondent: Ms. P. SAPNA REDDY SC FOR J. V. PRASAD(sc FoR lNcoME TAX) The Court made the following ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJT I.T.T.A.No.l of 2OO9 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAllI KOSHY) Heard Mr. Y. Ratnakar, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.P. Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearingon behalf of Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel forIncome Tax, for the sole respondent. 2. The present is an appeal hled by the appellant underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 196 I assailing the orderpassed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad BenchB" at Hyderabad in LT.A.Nos.SO4 to 5O7 lHyd/2OO3 andI.T.A.Nos.562 to 565/Hyd/2003, dated 3O.O5.20O8 (for short,'the impugned order'). 3. Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal partly allowed theappeals preferred by the respondent,vtzI.T.A.Nos.504 to5OT /Hyd/2OO3, and simultaneously dismissed the appealspreferred by the assessee, viz., I.T.A.Nos.562, 564 and565/Hyd/2OO3, while partly allowing I.T.A.No.563lHyd/Ba,uide order dated 3O.05.2OO8 4. On 27.07.2009, a Division Bench of this Court admittedthe instant appeal on the following substantial question of law,vtz "Whether on the facts and in the circttm-stonces of thecase, the omission to con-sider mateial on record, submissionscanuassed, euidence and the case lau.ts cited uhile dtsposing ofthe appeal would constitute a mistake apparent from the record,uesting [juisdiction ]in the Income Tox Appellate Tibunal to re-call its order under Section 254 (2) ofthe Income Tox Act ?" 5. The challenge raised by the appellant in the instalt appealprimarily seems to be on the ground that the appellate-Tribunalerroneously concluded that the appellant started business incomputers in 1988-99 whereas there was no such materia-lavailable before the Tribunal. Likewise, it was also contended bythe appellant that computation of profits on sa-le of computersby the respondent as also by the Tribunal is erroneous andarbitrary. "Whether on the facts and in the circttm-stonces of thecase, the omission to con-sider mateial on record, submissionscanuassed, euidence and the case lau.ts cited uhile dtsposing ofthe appeal would constitute a mistake apparent from the record,uesting [juisdiction ]in the Income Tox Appellate Tibunal to re-call its order under Section 254 (2) ofthe Income Tox Act ?" 5. The challenge raised by the appellant in the instalt appealprimarily seems to be on the ground that the appellate-Tribunalerroneously concluded that the appellant started business incomputers in 1988-99 whereas there was no such materia-lavailable before the Tribunal. Likewise, it was also contended bythe appellant that computation of profits on sa-le of computersby the respondent as also by the Tribunal is erroneous andarbitrary. 6. Upon going through the impugned order passed by theTribunal, what is apparently evident is that the Tribunal hadconsidered these very grounds which the appellant has raisedextensively in the grounds of appeal, and the Tribunal hasdecided these issues giving specific reasons while dismissing theappeals preferred by the assessee and partly allowing the -/ appeals filed by the respondent. Therefore, the iindings given bythe Tribunal appear to be finding on fact. Therefore, we are ofthe considered opinion that the question of law framed by thisCourt while admitting the appeal has to be answered in thenegative, holding that there was in fact no mistake apparent onrecord committed by the Tribuna_l while passing the impugnedorder. 7Therefore, the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.No costs. 8. Consequently, miscellaleous petitions pending, if any,shall stand closed. SD/. K.SRINIVASA RAOJOINT REGISTRAR(-,$rSECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench [,,B', ]Hyderabad.2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax -lll, Hyderabad ( Appeals) , Guntur ,CAMP at Hyderabad2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax -lll, Hyderabad ( Appeals) , Guntur ,CAMP at Hyderabad 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -5 (1 ), (lNV) Hyderabad 4. One CC to SRl. Y. RATNAKAR, Advocate 5. One CC to SRl. J. V. PRASAD (SC FOR TNCOME TAX) 6. Two CD Copies L:ul ${F HIGH COURT PSKJ & DATED: [2211112023] JUDGMENT lTTA.No.1 [of ][2009] DISMISSING WITHOUT t"&r1. 1 €-Jq>Zoo[ [4 ] [2024]** OFspATc .S"