Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M B Patel (Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : Tax Appeal No. 750 of 2013
Date of Judgement/Order : 15/10/2013
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Assessee in his return submission dated 6.11.2009 had explained that the purchase of 2 JCB machines were made from Yantraman Automac Pvt.Ltd., Baroda and both these purchases were on hypothecation with Centurion Bank of Punjab. The purchase bills also reflected hypothecation with the Bank. The company was established from 1998 and the Centurion Bank of Punjab eventually merged with HDFC Bank. The Tribunal also noted that the books of accounts were audited under section 44AB and the Tax Audit Report under the said provision had been duly furnished before the Assessing Officer, which was also evident from the assessment order. Thus, having noted the audited books of accounts in accordance with the provision of law being section 44AB and the availability of the funds in the balance-sheet filed on 31.3.2007, the Tribunal noted that the Tax Auditor did not point out any discrepancy in the entire report. Not only the purchase bills filed by the assessee reflected such hypothecation with the Bank but the repayment schedule also was furnished before the Assessing Officer. Hence, the Tribunal was of the opinion that in the event of any doubt, the Assessing Officer could have verified further those details and accordingly, it had deleted such amount.

We are in complete agreement with the order of the Tribunal. In fact, the entire question is in the realm of facts and there is nothing to point out any perversity in the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal. Not only there was an audited account in accordance with the provisions of section 44AB but substantive document with regard to the hypothecation with the Centurion Bank, which eventually merged with the HDFC Bank were adduced and the Revenue not having doubted the genuineness of any of these documents, there was no justification of either the Assessing Officer or CIT(Appeals) having doubted the transactions. The Tribunal’s decision gives no rise to the substantive question of law.

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

TAX APPEAL NO. 750 of 2013

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031