M/s. Bagaria Udyog v. C. I. T., Kolkata - XVI
[Citation -2014-LL-0916-52]

Citation 2014-LL-0916-52
Appellant Name M/s. Bagaria Udyog
Respondent Name C. I. T., Kolkata - XVI
Court HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/09/2014
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags application for rectification • disallowance of interest • business consideration • business connection • deemed interest • interest paid
Bot Summary: The Court : This appeal was admitted on the following question :- Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the appellant s Miscellaneous application for rectification of the error apparent in the order dated May 28, 2003 and its purported findings in that behalf are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse Heard Mr.Bhowmick, learned Advocate for the appellant. It is submitted by Mr.Bhowmick that since the instant appeal arises out of the order dated 10th December, 2003, passed by the learned Tribunal dismissing the miscellaneous application and as the parent order has been set aside by the High Court, the instant appeal has become infructuous. Since the parent order has been set aside by the High Court in Bagoria Udyog, the instant appeal has become infructuous. Urgent certified photocopy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all requisite formalities.


ORDER SHEET ITA No.243 of 2004 IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE M/S. BAGARIA UDYOG Versus C. I. T., KOLKATA - XVI BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. Appearance: Ms. Sanjay Bhowmick, Adv. Court : This appeal was admitted on following question :- Whether Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting appellant s Miscellaneous application for rectification of error apparent in order dated May 28, 2003 and its purported findings in that behalf are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse ? Heard Mr.Bhowmick, learned Advocate for appellant. It is submitted by Mr. Bhowmick, that High Court by its judgement dated 17th March, 2011 had set aside parent order in Bagoria Udyog versus Commissioner of Income-Tax; [2011]334 ITR 280 (Cal) which was on following questions :- (i)Whether Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in entering upon question of allowability of interest paid by appellant on moneys borrowed by it when question before it was as to whether any deemed interest accrued to appellant in respect of loan advanced to firm M/s. Hamlet and its purported findings directing 2 disallowance of interest paid are beyond scope of appeal filed by Revenue? (ii)In event answer to question No.1 is in negative, whether purported findings of Tribunal that there was no business connection between appellant and said firm or that any such admission was made by appellant s authorized representative or that loan given to said firm was not on business consideration or that borrowed money to extent of Rs.1,09,94,298/- was not used by appellant for purpose of its business and directing disallowance of interest referable to said sum of Rs.1,09,94,298/- are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse? Submission is Hon ble High Court had affirmed order of CIT(A) by answering first question therein in negative and second question in affirmative. It is submitted by Mr.Bhowmick that since instant appeal arises out of order dated 10th December, 2003, passed by learned Tribunal dismissing miscellaneous application and as parent order has been set aside by High Court, instant appeal has become infructuous. Since parent order has been set aside by High Court in Bagoria Udyog (supra), instant appeal has become infructuous. This appeal is disposed of. Urgent certified photocopy of this order be supplied to parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (SOUMITRA PAL, J.) (DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) cs M/s. Bagaria Udyog v. C. I. T., Kolkata - XVI
Report Error