Telangana High Court
M/S.K.N.Murthy Jewellers vs The Income Tax Officer on 18 June, 2025
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
Page 1 of 5
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
I.T.T.A.No.413 of 2012
and
I.T.T.A.No.246 of 2014
Common Judgment : (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY)
Since the appeals are filed by the same assessee for
different assessment years and the issue involved therein is also
same, we proceed to decide the instant appeals by this Common
Judgment.
2. I.T.T.A.No.413 of 2012 is filed by the appellant under
Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the
common order dated 11.04.2012 in I.T.A.No.493/Hyd/2008
passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench
'A', Hyderabad; and I.T.T.A.No.246 of 2014 is filed by the
appellant under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
challenging the common order dated 11.04.2012 in
I.T.A.No.494/Hyd/2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad (for short, 'the
impugned common order').
Page 2 of 5
3. Heard Mr.A.V. Raghu Ram, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Mr. K. Vasantkumar, learned counsel for the appellant;
and Ms.B. Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for
the Income Tax Department, for the respondent-State.
4. On 24.07.2013, a Division Bench of this Court headed by
Hon'ble the Chief Justice admitted the appeal after passing the
following order in I.T.T.A.No.413 of 2012, viz.,
"After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and
after going through the impugned judgment and order, we admit
the appeal in relation to the assessment year 2003-04 on the
following substantial questions of law :
(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,
the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the material
found during Survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act
proves the concealment of particulars when the income was
determined by resorting to estimation ?
(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in not
appreciating the legal provision that the provisions of Section
271(1)(c) could not be attracted when the income determined is on
an estimate basis and not based on any material?
Issue notice to the respondent.
Let paper book compiling all the appeal papers be filed
within six weeks from date."
5. On the same day, i.e., on 24.07.2013, a Division Bench of
this Court headed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice admitted the
appeal after passing the following order in I.T.T.A.No.246 of
2014, viz.,
"After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and
after going through the impugned judgment and order of the
learned Tribunal, we admit the appeal in relation to the
assessment year 2004-05 on the following substantial questions
of law, viz.,
(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,
the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the
material found during survey under Section 133A of the Income
Tax Act proves the concealment of particulars when the income
was determined by resorting to estimation?
(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in not
appreciating the legal provision that the provisions of Section
271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act could not be attracted when the
income determined is on an estimate basis and not based on
any material?
Issue notice to the respondent and let the paper book
compiling all the appeal papers be filed within six weeks from
date.
Let this matter be heard along with I.T.T.A.No.413 of
2012."
6. To-day, when the matters are taken up for hearing, the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the
findings arrived at by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of
Appeals and by the Tribunal are unsustainable more particularly
for the reason that the estimation part arrived at by the said
authorities is without any proper strong basis; and therefore,
contended that the amount of penalty imposed on the appellant
is on the higher side.
7. However, perusal of the record particularly the categorical
findings given by the authorities would reveal that the appellant-
assessee had in fact not produced the relevant books to show the
actual part of the turnover. Moreover, the books that were
produced before the authorities were not complete in all respects
on the basis of which the actual turnover should have been
assessed. In the said factual backdrop of the case, if the
authorities have proceeded and made assessment on the basis of
the estimation, the same cannot be said to be in any manner
perverse. Further, what is reflected is that the orders passed by
the Commissioner of Appeals and by the Tribunal are fortified by
judicial precedents referred to in those judgments, and therefore
would also be difficult to hold that the impugned common order
passed by the Tribunal to be bad in law.
8. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the instant appeals
being devoid of merit deserve to be and are accordingly
dismissed. No costs.
9. As a consequence, miscellaneous petitions pending if
any, shall stand closed.
__________________
P.SAM KOSHY, J
_________________________________
NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J
Date : 18.06.2025
Ndr
