2011 (2) TMI 128 - HC - Income Tax

Bogus purchase and sale transactions - Deleting the addition made by the A.O. on account of transaction of sale of jewellery - the matter is covered in favour of the revenue by judgment of the Court, CIT v. Sh. Tejinder Singh HUF (2011 -TMI - 203492 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT), wherein order of the Tribunal which has been followed in the present case, was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision - Decided in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act against ITAT order for assessment year 1998-99.
2. Deletion of addition made by the A.O. on account of transaction of sale of jewellery.
3. Justification of ITAT in following the order of the Special Bench of ITAT, New Delhi.
4. Contradictory findings in the order of the Special Bench of ITAT, New Delhi.
5. ITAT following its own decision in a different case without appreciating the facts.
6. Acceptance of genuineness of jewellery transactions based on probabilities conflicting with 'Normal human conduct' principle.
7. Application of different yardsticks by ITAT in requiring cross-examination and accepting respondent's averments.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the revenue against the ITAT order for the assessment year 1998-99 under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act. The substantial questions of law proposed included the deletion of addition made by the A.O. on account of a transaction of sale of jewellery without proper appreciation of evidence on record and the justification of ITAT in following the order of the Special Bench of ITAT, New Delhi.

2. The matter was argued by the counsel for the revenue, citing a judgment of the Court in a similar case where the Tribunal's order was set aside and remanded for a fresh decision. Despite the usual practice of issuing notice to the assessee, it was deemed unnecessary as the Tribunal had followed the same order which was previously reviewed by the Court.

3. Consequently, the Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits after hearing both parties. The decision was made without notice to the assessee, with the option given to the respondent-assessee to move the Court if aggrieved by the order. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, ensuring the opportunity for further recourse if needed.

4. The judgment highlighted various issues such as contradictory findings, application of legal principles, and the need for a fair hearing in tax matters. The Court's decision to remand the case for a fresh decision emphasized the importance of proper evaluation of evidence and adherence to legal procedures in tax assessments.