Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri S Parasmal Gidia on 8 March, 2021
TCA.No.153 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Tax Case Appeal No.153 of 2021
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Trichy. ...Appellant
Vs
Shri S Parasmal Gidia ...Respondent
APPEAL under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against
the order dated 14.09.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D'
Bench, Chennai in I.T.(SS) A.No.4/Mds/2017 for the block assessment
period 1997 to 2003.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan, SSC
For Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
TCA.No.153 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J)
This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), is directed against the order dated
14.09.2017 made in I.T.(SS) A.No.4/Mds/2017 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity) for the
block assessment period 1997 to 2003.
2. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of
law for consideration:
"1. Whether the volunatry admission made
by the Assessee during the course of search loses
its evidentiary value and is not binding on the
assessee because of the subsequent retraction of
the statement made after two years could render
the assessment in valid?
2. Whether in the absence of any material
evidence produced by the assessee to the effect of
sale of jewelry (difference in jewellery found and
jewellery admitted in the W.T return) would the
onus shift from the assessee to that of the
department for proving that utilization of the sale
http://www.judis.nic.in
TCA.No.153 of 2021
proceeds for the purpose other than investment
into money lending business is sustainable?"
3. We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing
Counsel appearing for the appellant-Revenue and Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar,
learned counsel for the respondent.
4. The Assessing Officer completed the block assessment vide
order dated 31.12.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred
appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Trichy
[CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) took note of the order passed by the Tribunal in the
earlier round in ITA.No.5/Mds/2007 dated 17.10.2008 and by extracting the
relevant paragraph of the said order, allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the
same, the Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal
confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A). This is how the Revenue is
before us by way of this appeal.
5. On a perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal in the earlier
round in ITA.No.5/Mds/2007 dated 17.10.2008, we find that there was a
positive direction to the Assessing Officer to grant certain reliefs to the
http://www.judis.nic.in
TCA.No.153 of 2021
assessee. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows:
"Therefore, we set aside the order of the
CIT(Appeals) and remit the matter to the
Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the
search document carefully and verify whether
cash was available with the assessee and sale
proceeds from sale of jewellery etc have been used
for acquiring other assets and if not found so,
then corresponding credit should be given
towards unaccounted money lending business. In
the light of above facts, I hold that the Assessing
Officer is directed to give credit for the sale value
of jewellery at Rs.96,23,565/- against the
investment in money lending business."
6. On a reading of the above direction, it is clear that the
Assessing Officer is bound to follow the same. Admittedly, the Revenue did
not prefer any appeal against the above said order passed by the Tribunal.
Therefore, the order and direction binds the Revenue. This fact was noted
by the Tribunal in the impugned order and in our opinion, the Tribunal
rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
http://www.judis.nic.in
TCA.No.153 of 2021
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find
that there are no good grounds to interfere with the order passed by the
Tribunal. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed and the substantial
questions of law are answered against the Revenue. No costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (R.N.M.,J.)
08.03.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
hvk
To
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
'D' Bench, Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Trichy.
http://www.judis.nic.in
TCA.No.153 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J
AND
R.N.MANJULA,J
hvk
TCA.No.153 of 2021
08.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
