ITO,Ward-8(3), Kolkata, Kolkata V. Rachayita Fashion Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

CO 47/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9093 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A P ROY
• Assessee Lawyers: SUDHINDRA NATH NAG

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH A , KOLKATA [ () . . . . . . . . , ,, , , ! '# ! '# ! '# ! '# ] ]] ] [BEFORE HONBLE SRI R.S.SYAL, AM & HONBLE SRI G EORGE MATHAN, JM] % % % % /ITA NO.522/KOL/2012 &#' ()/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ('+ / APPELLANT ) - # - ( -.'+ /RESPONDENT) I.T.O., WARD-8(3) -VERSUS- M/S.RACHAYITA FASHION PVT, LTD., KOLKATA KOLKATA (PAN: AABCR 6128 B) C.O. NO.47/KOL/2012 % % % % /A/O ITA NO.522/KOL/2012 &#' ()/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ('+ / CROSS OBJECTOR ) ( -.'+ /RESPONDENT) M/S.RACHAYITA FASHION PVT. LTD.. - # - I.T.O., WARD-8(3) KOLKATA -VERSUS- KOLKATA (PAN: AABCR 6129 B) '+ / 0 / FOR THE DEPARTMENT SHRI A.P.ROY, SR.DR -.'+ / 0 / FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SUDHINDRA NATH NAG, CA 1#2 / 3 /DATE OF HEARING : 11.11.2013 4( / 3 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.11.2013 5 / ORDER PER SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM ITA NO.522/KOL/2012 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVEN UE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-VIII, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO.367/CIT(A)-VI II/KOL/08-09 DATED 18.01.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. C.O. NO.47/KOL/2012 IS A CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE REVENUES APPEAL IN ITA NO.522 /KOL/2012. 2. SHRI A.P.ROY, SR DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF T HE REVENUE AND SHRI SUDHINDRA NATH NAG, CA REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . 3. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS CHALLEN GED THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCES, THOUGH ADEQUAT E OPPORTUNITY HAD BEEN PROVIDED ITA NO.522/KOL/2012 & C.O.NO.47/KO L/2012 ITO-WD.8,KOL VS M/S.RACHAYITA FASHION P VT.LTD. A.YR.2006-07 2 TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE THE AO A ND THE SAME WAS NOT PRODUCED EVEN AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT OR AT THE TIME OF RE MAND PROCEEDINGS. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT VARI OUS DETAILS HAD BEEN CALLED FOR FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVIDED THE DETAILS SUCH AS THE ADDRESS OF THE CREDITORS, AS ALSO THE ADDRESS OF THE CUSTOMERS WHO ARE PROVIDING THE ADVANCES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) CERTAIN D ETAILS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WHICH HAD BEEN SENT TO THE AO FOR OBTAINING THE REMAND RE PORT AND EVEN IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS EVIDENCES HAVE NOT BEEN PRODUCED. IT WA S THE SUBMISSION THAT EVEN THOUGH NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCED THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT OF NON FURNISHING OF EVIDENCES IN THE ASSESSMENT STAGE OR AT THE REMAND STAGE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE NOT PROPERLY PRODUCED. IN THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS CERTA IN BOOKS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE REVE NUE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICAT ION. 4. IN REPLY THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ADMITTEDLY TH E ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRODUCED ALL THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS RELATED TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND THE EVIDENCES BEING THE ADDRESS OF THE CREDITORS AND CUSTOMERS WERE BEING ASKED FOR IN 2008 AND THERE WE RE SOME CHANGES IN THE ADDRESS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF T HE ISSUES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. IN RESPECT OF THE CROSS OBJ ECTION IT WAS ALSO AGREED THAT THE ISSUES COULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AND THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD PRODUCE ALL THE EVIDENCES AS CALLED FOR BY TH E AO. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS ADMITTED BY THE ASESSEE THAT DUE TO CERTAIN INADVERTENT MISTAKES ALL THE EVIDENC ES AND DETAILS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AS ALSO D URING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESEE WAS NOW IN A POSITION TO PRODUCE ALL THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO, THE ISSUES IN BOTH THE REVENUES APPEAL AS ALSO THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR RE- ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ITA NO.522/KOL/2012 & C.O.NO.47/KO L/2012 ITO-WD.8,KOL VS M/S.RACHAYITA FASHION P VT.LTD. A.YR.2006-07 3 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE A ND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.11.2013. SD/- SD/- [ . . , ,, , ] [ . ! '# , ] [R.S.SYAL] [ GEORGE MATHAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( (( (3 3 3 3) )) ) DATE: 11.11.2013. R.G.(.P.S.) 5 / -&&6 76(8- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S.RACHAYITA FASHION PVT. LTD., 87L, PARK STREET, KOLKATA-700016. 2 THE I.T.O., WARD-8(3), KOLKATA. 3 . CIT KOLKATA 4. CIT(A)- VIII, KOLKATA. 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA .6 -&/ TRUE COPY, 5#1/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES