Vilas Mahadeorao Harde v. The Commissioner of Income-tax-­I, Nagpur
[Citation -2017-LL-0907-9]

Citation 2017-LL-0907-9
Appellant Name Vilas Mahadeorao Harde
Respondent Name The Commissioner of Income-tax-­I, Nagpur
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/09/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags question of law
Bot Summary: 17.odt Mahadeorao Harde in the assessment year 2006-2007 is the subject matter of challenge in Income Tax Appeal No. 56 of 2017. Income Tax Appeal No. 57 of 2017 pertains to inclusion of cash of Rs.12,86,786/- in the assessment of income tax payable by the appellant for the assessment year 2007- 08. According to the Department, it was a cash which was found in the hands of the appellant in search and therefore, it cannot be included in the assessment of income tax of M/s. Maharaja Developer, which has disowned it. Income Tax Appeal No. 58 of 2017 relates to inclusion of an amount of Rs.22 lakhs in the assessment of the appellant for the assessment year 2007-08. In view of the fact that the appeals preferred by M/s.Maharaja Developer are pending for adjudication before the Commissioner of Income Tax, whether the orders passed by the Tribunal which are impugned in these appeals can be set aside with an order of remand, so that all the matters can be heard together after the decision in appeals preferred by M/s. Maharaja Developer by the Commissioner of Income Tax, so as to avoid possible conflict in the decision. The order dated 30.06.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, in Income Tax No.203/Nag/2012 and the orders dated 10.07.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, in Income Tax Appeal Nos.295/Nag/2013 307/Nag/2013 are set aside. The matters are remanded back to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide it afresh.


ITL56,57&58.17.odt IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 56 OF 2017 Vilas Mahadeorao Harde, N 110, Reshimbagh, Nagmoti Layoug, Nagpur 440 009. APPELLANT Versus Commissioner of Income Tax I, Aayakar Bhawan, Telankhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. RESPONDENT Mr. L.S. & K.P. Dewani, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S.N. Bhattad, Advocate for Respondent. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 57 OF 2017 Vilas Mahadeorao Harde, N 110, Reshimbagh, Nagmoti Layoug, Nagpur 440 009 APPELLANT Versus Commissioner of Income Tax I, Aayakar Bhawan, Telankhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur RESPONDENT Mr. L.S. & K.P. Dewani, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S.N. Bhattad, Advocate for Respondent. 2 ITL56,57&58.17.odt INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 58 OF 2017 Vilas Mahadeorao Harde, N 110, Reshimbagh, Nagmoti Layoug, Nagpur 440 009. APPELLANT Versus Commissioner of Income Tax I, Aayakar Bhawan, Telankhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur RESPONDENT Mr. L.S. & K.P. Dewani, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S.N. Bhattad, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED : September 7, 2017. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.K. DESHPANDE, J.) Heard finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for parties. 2. On 24.08.2017 we passed order which is reproduced below : amount of Rs.30.10 lakhs assessed as income at hands of appellant Vilas 3 ITL56,57&58.17.odt Mahadeorao Harde in assessment year 2006-2007 is subject matter of challenge in Income Tax Appeal No. 56 of 2017. contention of appellant is that this amount is not assessable at hands of appellant. According to Department, said amount is received under receipts in name of M/s. Maharaja Developer, possession of which is found with appellant. According to Department, firm M/s. Maharaja Developer had disowned this amount and according to it, it is required to be included in assessment of appellant. Income Tax Appeal No. 57 of 2017 pertains to inclusion of cash of Rs.12,86,786/- in assessment of income tax payable by appellant for assessment year 2007- 08. According to Shri Dewani, learned counsel for appellant, this amount belongs to firm M/s. Maharaja Developer and therefore, it cannot be included in income of assessee for assessment year 2007-08. According to Department, it was cash which was found in hands of appellant in search and therefore, it cannot be included in assessment of income tax of M/s. Maharaja Developer, which has disowned it. Shri Bhattad further submits that this amount was not added in income of M/s. Maharaja Developer for said assessment year. Income Tax Appeal No. 58 of 2017 relates to inclusion of amount of Rs.22 lakhs in assessment of appellant for assessment year 2007-08. This is received under receipts of M/s. Maharaja Developer, which is found to be in possession of appellant and recovered in course of search. Shri Dewani, learned counsel for appellant submits that this amount should not have been included in assessment of income of appellant for assessment year 2007-08 for reason that amount belongs to firm. According to Department, this amount is already assessed in account of M/s. Maharaja Developer. Shri Bhattad, learned counsel appearing for Department submits that appeals filed by M/s. Maharaja Developer are pending before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and this fact was not brought to notice of Tribunal when orders were passed. There appears some dispute between appellant and ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 12:11:59 ::: 4 ITL56,57&58.17.odt partners of M/s. Maharaja Developer. In this background, question is whether amounts in question are to be included in account of M/s. Maharaja Developer as its income for computation of tax or in account of assessee, appellant herein. After hearing learned counsels appearing for parties, we frame following common substantial question of law arising out of all these appeals for consideration by this Court. In view of fact that appeals preferred by M/s.Maharaja Developer are pending for adjudication before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), whether orders passed by Tribunal which are impugned in these appeals can be set aside with order of remand, so that all matters can be heard together after decision in appeals preferred by M/s. Maharaja Developer by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), so as to avoid possible conflict in decision. Admit. Learned counsel for respondent waives service of notice. Put up these appeals for final disposal on next Thursday i.e. on 31.08.2017 by consent of learned counsels appearing for parties. 3. Shri Bhattad, learned counsel for Department invites our attention to submission made by him before this Court in aforesaid order that appeals filed by M/s. Maharaja Developers are pending before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and this fact was not brought to notice of Tribunal when orders were passed. Shri Bhattad submits that there is no quarrel about statement made before this Court that Tribunal ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 12:11:59 ::: 5 ITL56,57&58.17.odt was not aware about appeals filed by M/s. Maharaja Developers before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). He however, submits that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has now decided all appeals preferred by M/s. Maharaja Developers on 12.09.2014 and 31.07.2014. He further informs that he is not aware as to whether any appeal is preferred before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against these decisions delivered by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. Be that as it may, learned counsel appearing for parties agree that in terms of substantial question of law framed by this court, matters required to be remanded back to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for decision afresh to avoid possible conflict in cases of assessee as well as M/s. Maharaja Developers. Hence, these appeals will have to be allowed with order of remand. 5. In result, appeals are allowed. order dated 30.06.2015 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, in Income Tax No.203/Nag/2012 and orders dated 10.07.2015 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, in Income Tax Appeal Nos.295/Nag/2013 & 307/Nag/2013 are set aside. matters are remanded back to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide it afresh. If it is ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 12:11:59 ::: 6 ITL56,57&58.17.odt found that appeals have been preferred against order dated 12.09.2014 and 31.07.2014 passed by Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals), Nagpur, said appeals shall also be decided along with these appeals by Tribunal. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE waghmare VilasMahadeoraoHarde v. TheCommissionerofIncome-tax-I, Nagpur
Report Error