E.Palaniappan (HUF), Tiruchengode v. ITO, Salem

ITA 588/CHNY/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 58821714 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AACHP1589H
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 588/CHNY/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant E.Palaniappan (HUF), Tiruchengode
Respondent ITO, Salem
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 08-11-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 08-11-2011
Next Hearing Date 08-11-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 30-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 588/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 E.PALANIAPAN (HUF) PATLUR ELAYAMPALAYAM GOUNDAMPALAYAM TRICHENGODE. PAN: AACHP1589H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-II(I) GANDHIJI ROAD SALEM. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR ERODE ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN JR. STANDING COUNSEL DATE OF HEARING : 8 TH NOVEMBER 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 8 TH NOVEMBER 2011 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2004-05. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS) AT SALEM DATED 31.03.2010 AND ARISES O UT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT 1961. ITA NO.588/ MDS/2010 2 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN N OT CONSIDERING THE FINER DISTINCTION BETWEEN GUR AND J AGGERY AS APPEARING IN SCHEDULE III TO THE TAMIL NADU GENERAL SALES TAX ACT SUGGESTING AS DIFFERENT COMMODITIES. 3. THIS ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED BY THE ITAT. CHENNAI BENCHES AGAINST THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THE OR DER REPORTED IN 312 ITR (AT) 136 (CHENNAI). THE TRIBUNA L HAS HELD THAT THE PROFITS FROM SALE OF JAGGERY HAS NO N EXUS WITH ITS AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS AND THEREFORE SUCH INCOME N OT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) HAS RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE ABOVE BINDING DECISION. IN SHORT WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIAB LE TO BE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON TUESDAY THE 8 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) ( DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI DATED THE 8 TH NOVEMBER 2011. SOMU ITA NO.588/ MDS/2010 3 COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT ( 4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.