2013 (10) TMI 317 - HC - Income Tax

High Court overturns Tribunal, limits CIT(Appeals) scope to sales tax issue for tax liability determination.

The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, overturning the Tribunal's decision. The Court held that the CIT(Appeals) had exceeded the scope of the ... Addition u/s 69C - proof of Deposit of sales tax with authorities - The Tribunal remanded the proceedings back to the Commissioner of Appeals on the ground that if the assessee had retained three percent of the Sales Tax out of the payment made by the Swamy Chemicals, but, no tax is deposited with the Government, surely, the same would become the income of the assessee. - Held that:- it was not open for the CIT(Appeals) to examine the entire nature of the payment of Rs.18,83,000/-, to consider, whether, the same can be considered as taxable in the hands of the assessee. It was only for the CIT(Appeals) to examine that any part of the three percent of the Sales Tax element was or was not deposited by the assessee with the Government and to decide the assessee's tax liability to pay tax - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Interpretation of the Tribunal's previous order dated 30.8.2005.2. Validity of addition under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.3. Scope of remand proceedings and authority of the CIT(Appeals) in reconsidering the issue.Analysis:Issue 1: Interpretation of the Tribunal's previous order dated 30.8.2005The High Court observed that the Tribunal's previous order made conclusive observations regarding the nature of the transaction and directed the CIT(Appeals) to examine whether the sales tax was actually deposited with the Government authorities. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal's order set parameters for the CIT(Appeals) to reconsider the matter, focusing on whether the sales tax was retained by the assessee or deposited with the Government.Issue 2: Validity of addition under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961The revenue challenged the CIT(Appeals) order deleting the addition under Section 69C of the Act. The Tribunal remanded the proceedings to the CIT(Appeals) to decide the matter afresh, considering whether the sales tax amount was retained by the assessee or deposited with the Government. The CIT(Appeals) subsequently justified the addition by examining the transaction's nature, stating that payments were made by cheque but returned in cash, leading to the addition upheld by the Tribunal.Issue 3: Scope of remand proceedings and authority of the CIT(Appeals)The assessee contended that the CIT(Appeals) exceeded the scope of the remand proceedings by examining the entire transaction's nature. The Tribunal, however, confirmed the addition. The High Court clarified that the CIT(Appeals) should have focused solely on whether any part of the sales tax element was deposited with the Government to determine the tax liability of the assessee. The Court held that the CIT(Appeals) should not have examined the entire payment to decide taxability, as the Tribunal's remand was specific to the sales tax issue.In conclusion, the High Court allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. The Court reversed the Tribunal's judgment to the extent that the CIT(Appeals) had exceeded the scope of the remand proceedings by considering the entire nature of the payment, emphasizing that the focus should have been on the sales tax element to determine tax liability.