Mailam India Limited, Pondicherry V. ACIT, Pondicherry

CO 48/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1717 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: K BALASUBR AMANIAN
• Section: 80IB; 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , . !' , # $ % [ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.2026/MDS/2013 & C.O.NO.48/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE I PUDUCHERRY VS. M/S MAILAM INDIA LTD NO.3/17 MAILAM MAIN ROAD SEDARAPET, PONDICHERRY [PAN AAACM 5330 J ] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT /CROSS OBJECTOR ) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI A B KOLI, JCIT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K BALASUBRAMANIAN, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 1 1 - 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 - 1 2 - 2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-VI, CHENN AI, DATED 30.8.2013 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED CROSS OBJECTION AGAINST THE VERY SAM E ORDER OF THE CIT(A). WE HEARD THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION ITA NO. 2026/13 CO.48/14 :- 2 -: OF THE ASSESSEE TOGETHER AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME B Y THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. SINCE THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WHICH GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER, IT HAS TO BE DECIDED FIRST. 3. SHRI K BALASUBRAMANIAN, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF IN COME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON 23.11.2006 ADMITTING A T OTAL INCOME OF ` 72,48,517/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143 (3) ON 27.11.2008. AFTER FOUR YEARS, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 DATED 6.11.2012 FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT . REFERRING TO THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMEN T, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE EXCLUDED INCOME RECEIV ED FROM RECLAMATION WORK FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT . ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE DE TAILS WHICH ARE REQUIRED FOR COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, TH E ASSESSMENT CANNOT BE REOPENED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS I N VIEW OF PROVISO TO SEC. 147 OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 2026/13 CO.48/14 :- 3 -: 4. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI A B KOLI, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCLOS ED INCOME OF ` 18,37,660/- ON RECLAMATION WORK. WHILE COMPUTING T HE DEDUCTION U/S 80IB THE RECEIPT OF ` 18,37,660/- WAS INCLUDED. ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, THIS IS A NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESS EE IN COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. TH E ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTEDLY DISCLOSED THE INCOME FROM RECLAMATION WO RK OF ` 18,37,660/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED COMPUTAT ION OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ENTIRE DETAILS NECESSARY FOR COMPL ETING THE ASSESSMENT ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THERE IS NO NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN DISCLOSING ANY PARTICULARS WHICH ARE RE QUIRED FOR COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT. MERELY BECAUSE THE ASS ESSEE INCLUDED THE INCOME FROM RECLAMATION WORK WHILE COMPUTING DE DUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT, THAT CANNOT BE CONSTRUED AS NEGLIG ENCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE REOPENING OF ASSESSM ENT AFTER EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN W HICH THE RETURN WAS FILED CANNOT BE ALLOWED IN VIEW OF PROVISO TO S EC. 147 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED I N REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. ITA NO. 2026/13 CO.48/14 :- 4 -: 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY TO AD JUDICATE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH DECEMBER, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ) ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI ! / DATED: 18 TH DECEMBER, 2015 RD !' # $% &% / COPY TO: 1 . '( / APPELLANT 4. ) / CIT 2. #*'( / RESPONDENT 5. %+, # - / DR 3. ) () / CIT(A) 6. ,/ 0 / GF