The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-3 v. Navin Laboratories Pvt. Ltd - 2019-LL-0916-172

Citation	2019-LL-0916-172
Appellant Name	The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-3
Respondent Name	Navin Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	16/09/2019
Assessment Year	2007-08
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	job work • substantial question of law
Bot Summary:	This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Ahmedabad dated 04.02.2019 in the ITA No.292/Ahd/2011 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that none of the two questions as proposed by the Revenue could be termed as substantial questions of law. Both the questions proposed are pure questions of fact. The Revenue, after due consideration of all the relevant aspects, has recorded the finding of fact in favour of the assessee. In the overall view of the matter, we are convinced that there is no substantial question of law involved in the present Tax Appeal. In the result, this Tax Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

C/TAXAP/649/2019 ORDER IN HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 649 of 2019 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 Versus M/S NAVIN LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for Appellant(s) No. 1 for Opponent(s) No. 1 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO Date : 16/09/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short Act, 1961 ) is at instance of Revenue and is directed against order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short Tribunal ), D Bench, Ahmedabad dated 04.02.2019 in ITA No.292/Ahd/2011 for Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Revenue has proposed following two questions of law for consideration of this Court : [A] Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting addition on account of difference of job work amounting to Rs.1,90,23,678/- without considering fact that because of non Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 10:36:40 IST 2019 C/TAXAP/649/2019 ORDER production of day to day stock/production records by assessee before Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A), correctness of claim of assessee remained unverifiable? [B] Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting addition of suppressed production amounting to Rs.1,60,23,176/- on similar facts related to difference in job work, without considering fact that assessee had suppressed production of tablets/capsules? 3. Having heard learned counsel appearing for Revenue and having gone through materials on record, we are of view that none of two questions as proposed by Revenue could be termed as substantial questions of law. Both questions proposed are pure questions of fact. Revenue, after due consideration of all relevant aspects, has recorded finding of fact in favour of assessee. 4. In overall view of matter, we are convinced that there is no substantial question of law involved in present Tax Appeal. In result, this Tax Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (A. C. RAO, J) Dolly Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 10:36:40 IST 2019 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-3 v. Navin Laboratories Pvt. Ltd

Metadata

Judgment