Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (3) TMI 1018

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... his is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961') being aggrieved by the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bench Indore in ITA No. 185/Ind/2020 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The following substantial question of law has been proposed in this appeal : (i) Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in confirming the Order of CIT(A) that the undisclosed income surrendered during the Search and Seizure action, is liable to be taxed at normal rate instead of the tax rate stipulated under Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether on the facts and in circum .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s made to the total income and income so declared was taxed at special rate in view of the provisions under Section 115BBE of the Act of 1961. The Assessing Officer himself has admitted that at the time of Search and Seizure that the undisclosed income so surrendered was not entered in regular books of accounts. The undisclosed income falls within the ambit of Section 69A of the Act and therefore, liable to be taxed at special rate within the meaning of Section 115BBE of the Act of 1961. Being aggrieved with the order of the Assessing Officer, the respondent/assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), Bhopal. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal vide order dated 31.01.2020 relying upon the contention put forth by the assessee that the undisclo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... involves a substantial question of law. (2) The Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner or Commission or an assessee aggrieved by any order passed by the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court and such appeal under this sub-section shall be (a) filed within one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the order appealed against is received by the assessee or the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner; (b) xxx (c) in the form of a memorandum of appeal precisely stating therein the substantial question of law involved. (2A) The High Court may admit an appeal after the expiry of the period of one hundred and twen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that an appeal to the High Court from a decision of the Tribunal lies only when a substantial question of law is involved, and where the High Court comes to the conclusion that a substantial question of law arises from the said order, it is mandatory that such question(s) must be formulated. The expression "substantial question of law" is not defined in the Act. Nevertheless, it has acquired a definite connotation through various judicial pronouncements. 13. While explaining the import of the said expression, the Apex Court in case of Sir Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons, Ltd. Vs. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1314, observed that: "6. The proper test for determining whether a question of law raised in the case is subst .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e case. An entirely new point raised for the first time before the High Court is not a question involved in the case unless it goes to the root of the matter. It will, therefore, depend on the facts and circumstance of each case whether a question of law is a substantial one and involved in the case, or not; the paramount overall consideration being the need for striking a judicious balance between the indispensable obligation to do justice at all stages and impelling necessity of avoiding prolongation in the life of any lis." 15. In Hero Vinoth (Minor) Vs. Seshamma, (2006) 5 SCC 545, the Apex Court has observed that: "The general rule is that High Court will not interfere with the concurrent findings of the courts below. But it is not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... which is the final fact finding authority. A decision on fact of the Tribunal can be gone into by the High Court only if a question has been referred to it which says that the finding of the Tribunal on facts is perverse, in the sense that it is such as could not reasonably have been arrived at on the material placed before the Tribunal. In this case, there was no such question before the High Court. Unless and until a finding of fact reached by the Tribunal is canvassed before the High Court in the manner set out above, the High Court is obliged to proceed upon the findings of fact reached by the Tribunal and to give an answer in law to the question of law that is before it.'' 18. When tested on the anvil of the afore-noted lega .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates