Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 2189 2005 SLD 2189 (2005) 273 ITR 231
Punjab and Haryana High Court
IT APPEAL No. 252 OF 2004 JANUARY 11, 2005
G.S. SINGHVI AND, JASBIR SINGH, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Ambica Oil & General Mills*

v.

Income Tax Officer-cuMAssessing Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Orders of - Assessment year 1993-94 - Whether where after enumerating grounds taken in appeals filed by revenue and assessee and arguments of counsels, Tribunal dismissed assessee's appeal without assigning any reason whatsoever, order passed by Tribunal was liable to be set-aside on ground of violation of rules of natural justice - Held, yes K.L. Goyal for the Appellant. Rajesh Bindal for the Respondent. JUDGMENT G.S. Singhvi, J. - In this appeal filed under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the 1961 Act'), the appellant has prayed for determination of the following substantial questions of law : "(i )Whether the order of the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is sustainable in the eyes of law when no speaking order has been passed on the issues involved? (ii)Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified to uphold the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the issue of addition of Rs. 45,000 only and only on the ground that the Sales Tax Department has imposed some penalty, when necessary explanation has been given by the assessee? Whether the Assessing Officer under the Income-tax Act can pass an order, relying on the judgment of another department (Sales Tax Department), without any independent application of mind, to make an addition in the total income? (iii)Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified to uphold any addition in the total income, only and only on the ground that another department of the State Government, has taken an action under the Sales Tax Act, when it was explained that no penalty has been imposed upon the appellant-firm and no such demand of penalty has been paid by it?" 2. A perusal of the record shows that the appellant (hereinafter described as 'the assessee'), is engaged in the business of manufacturing oil. Its business premises were inspected by the sales tax authorities on 7-6-1992. Thereafter, proceedings for imposition of penalty under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (for short 'the 1973 Act'), were initiated on account of the alleged excess stock of sarson oil valued at Rs. 1,80,000.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492