Smt. Anaro Devi, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

CO 322/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8505 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-05-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHIM SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: S B GARG ADV SACHIN GARG
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 889/DEL/2012 & CO NO. 322/DEL/2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 889/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25(4), NEW DELHI VS. SMT. ANARO DEVI, W/O SHRI AJIT SINGH, VILLAGE- PAPRAWAT, P.O. NAJAFGARH, NEW DELHI 110 043 (PAN/GIR NO. : AIFPN3491H) AND C.O. NO. 322/DEL/2012 (IN ITA NO. 889/ DEL/2012) A.Y. 2006-07 SMT. ANARO DEVI, VS. ITO, WARD-25(4), C/O S.B. GARG & CO., CAS NEW DELHI 20/17, SHAKTI NAGAR, DELHI 110 007 (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. S.B. GARG, ADV., SACHIN GARG, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SH. BHIM SINGH, SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATE OUT OF ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS-XXIV), NEW DELHI PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2006-07. ITA NO. 889/DEL/2012 & CO NO. 322/DEL/2012 2 2. THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ERRED IN DELETING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 45,00,000/- BEING UNEXPLAINED CAS H CREDIT U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. II) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ERRED IN ACCEPTING SELF SERVING DOCUMENTS NOT CORROBORATED OR EXAMINED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. III) SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER TO REEXAMINE FRESH EVIDENCE IN A HOLISTIC MANNER. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ADD ANY OTHER GRO UND OF APPEAL. 3. THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECT ION READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF BOARDS INSTRUCTIONS. 2. THE PURPORTED INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT, FOR WHI CH PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREAFTER THE ACT) WERE INITIATED, WAS NOT FOUND TO HAVE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND THUS NO ADDITION ON THA T GROUND WAS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT; AND THEREFORE, I N VIEW OF LAW LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTION AL ITA NO. 889/DEL/2012 & CO NO. 322/DEL/2012 3 HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMI TED VS. C.I.T. (2011) 336 ITR 136 (DEL.), THE ASSESSMENT IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 3. THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 OF THE AC T IS BAD IN LAW, PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD, OR EVEN ANY REFERENCE TO ANY SUC H MATERIAL, WHICH JUSTIFIES THE ACTION U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS. WE FIND THAT IN THE CROSS OBJECTION ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUND THAT THE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE THAT THERE WAS NO PROPER JURISDICTION, AS NO ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE GROUND ON WHICH THE R EOPENING WAS DONE AND THAT FURTHER THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECOR D IN SUPPORT OF INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THAT THE ABOVE GROUNDS WERE NOT TAKEN BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (A). HENCE, THERE IS NO ADJUDICATION ON THESE A SPECTS BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 5. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL ALSO WE FIND THAT IN GRO UND NO. 3, IT HAS BEEN AGITATED THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A )S ORDER BE SET ASIDE AND MATTER RESTORE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TO REEXAMINE FRESH EVIDENCE IN A HOLISTIC MANNER. 6. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT INTERES T OF JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED, IF THE ISSUES RAISED ARE REMITTED BACK TO TH E FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CONSIDER ALL ASPECTS OF THE MATTER RAISED IN THIS CASE. WE ORDER AND HO LD ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO. 889/DEL/2012 & CO NO. 322/DEL/2012 4 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01/5/2013. SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - [ [[ [C.M. GARG] C.M. GARG] C.M. GARG] C.M. GARG] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE:- 01/5/2013 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 889/DEL/2012 & CO NO. 322/DEL/2012 5