9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1991 - HC - Income TaxAdmissibility of appeal in High court - Question of law or question of fact - commission of accommodation entries - HELD THAT - As in the present case the assessee itself offered profit rate at 0.26% accepted by the revenue for the A.Y. 2011-12 and which is more than in the case of M/s. Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. which was also related to Badalia Group of cases. In view of the same we find that the CIT-A was correct in directing the AO to reduce the addition - peal of the revenue is dismissed - no reason to admit the appeal.
Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeal, Question of law vs. question of fact in ITAT appeal
Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal: In the present case, the High Court considered an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The delay of 203 days was condoned after finding sufficient cause shown by the applicant. The Court allowed the application (GA No. 275 of 2019) and directed the Department to register the appeal immediately. Question of Law vs. Question of Fact in ITAT Appeal: Regarding ITAT No. 32 of 2019 and GA No. 276 of 2019, the High Court analyzed the nature of the questions raised in the appeal. It was observed that no question of law, let alone any substantial question of law, was involved in the matter. The issues raised by the revenue were deemed to be questions of fact. The Tribunal's findings were based on intelligible reasons, particularly comparing the profit rate offered by the assessee with a similar case. The Court upheld the CIT-A's decision to reduce the addition amount, finding no infirmity in the order. Consequently, the appeal of the revenue was dismissed, and the Court refused to admit the appeal. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the issues of condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the distinction between questions of law and questions of fact in the ITAT appeal. The Court allowed the delay condonation application, dismissed the revenue's appeal due to the absence of legal questions, and upheld the CIT-A's decision based on factual considerations.
|
