The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad v. M/S Ganesh Plantation Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13695 of 2022 ==========================================================THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),AHMEDABAD VersusM/S GANESH PLANTATION LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MR M.R.BHATT, SR.ADVOCATE, MR KARAN SANGHANI for M R BHATT &CO.(5953) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIAandHONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 26/07/2022 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Manish R. Bhatt forM.R.Bhatt and Co. for the petitioner. 2.By filing this petition under Article 226 and 227 of theConstitution what is prayed is to set aside order dated 6.7.2021passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in MiscellaneousApplication No.1520 of 2013. It was an application for review ofthe judgment and order passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal. 3.The facts in brief stated in the petition are inter alia thatthe respondent herein filed its return in respect of theassessment year 2008-09 declaring its total income. He claimedRs.4 crores under the head loss in contract account whichclaimed was disallowed by the Assessing Officer in itsassessment order dated 22.12.2010. The ground weighed withthe Assessing Officer was that the respondent failed to prove genuineness of the transaction with one Jay Corporation inrespect of which the loss had occurred. The Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) confirmed the order of the AssessingOfficer. When the respondent approached the Tribunal tochallenge the appellate authority’s order, the tribunal set asidethe said orders and allowed the claim of the aforesaid amountunder the head of loss in contract account. 3.1It appears that the said judgment and order of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal dated 6.12.2016 was sought to bereviewed by filing Miscellaneous Application No.115 of 2017which was dismissed by the Tribunal on 6.7.2021, which is theorder impugned herein. 4.While learned senior advocate raised various contentionsto urge the court that the review application ought to have beenallowed by the Tribunal, he fairly admitted the factum that thedepartment has already preferred appeal under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act against the aforementioned judgment andorder of the Tribunal dated 6.12.2016. 5.The dismissal of the Special Civil Application by this courtis only on the ground that the petitioner department haspreferred substantive appeal before this court. It goes withoutsaying that all the contentions of the petitioner will be open tobe raised in accordance with law in the appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. (N.V.ANJARIA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J)