Mrs. Sadhana Kamat., Panaji V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji., Panaji

CO 48/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1282 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K M MAHESH LD
• Keywords: Deemed dividend
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO S . 204 TO 208 /PNJ/2015 : A.Y S : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. RAMESH ANANT KAMAT H.NO. 760, ST. MARYS COLONY, NEAR LONDON HOTEL, MIRAMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : AELPK8089A ITA NOS. 209 TO 213/PNJ/2015 : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. DATTAPRASAD KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : ADVPK5364P ITA NOS. 214 TO 218/PNJ/2015 : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. ANJALI DATTAPRASAD KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : AEYPK0024J ITA NOS. 219 TO 223/PNJ/2015 : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. SADHANA RAMESH KAMAT H.NO. 760, ST. MARYS COLONY, NEAR LONDON HOTEL, MIRAMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : ADQPK0034P ITA NOS. 224 TO 228/PNJ/2015 : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. UDAY KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : ADQPK00 25Q 2 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 ITA NOS. 229 TO 233/PNJ/2015 : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. SMITA UDAY KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA (RESPONDENT) PAN : ALBPK8838J CO NOS. 29 TO 33/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 204 TO 208/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RAMESH ANANT KAMAT H.NO. 760, ST. MARYS COLONY, NEAR LONDON HOTEL, MIRAMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : AELPK8089A VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 34 TO 38/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 209 TO 213/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 DATTAPRASAD KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : ADVPK5364P VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 39 TO 43/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 214 TO 218/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ANJALI DATTAPRASAD KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : AEYPK0024J VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 44 TO 48/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 219 TO 223/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 SADHANA RAMESH KAMAT H.NO. 760, ST. MARYS COLONY, NEAR LONDON HOTEL, MIRAMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : ADQPK0034P VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) 3 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 CO NOS. 49 TO 53/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 224 TO 228/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 UDAY KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : ADQPK0025Q VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 54 TO 58/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 229 TO 233/PNJ/2015 ) : A.YS : 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 SMITA UDAY KAMAT WHITE BUNGALOW, OPP. HOTEL SOLMAR, PANAJI, GOA ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) PAN : ALBPK8838J VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEES BY : MIHIR NANIWADEKAR , CA REVENUE BY : K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 1 3 /08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 3 /08/2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : 1) ITA NOS. 204 TO 208/PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MR. RAMESH A. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 42/CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 122/CIT(A)/ PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 44/CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 124/CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 47/CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 127/CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 29 TO 33/PN J/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 204 TO 208/PNJ/2015. 4 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 2) ITA NOS. 20 9 TO 2 13 /PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MR. DATTAPRASAD A. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 2 8 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE /2014 - 15 & 1 08 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 30 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 10 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 33 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 13 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 3 4 TO 3 8 /PNJ/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 20 9 TO 2 13 /PNJ/2015. 3) ITA NOS. 2 14 TO 2 18 /PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MRS. ANJALI D. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 35 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE /2014 - 15 & 1 15 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 3 7 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 17 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 40 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 20 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 3 9 TO 43 /PNJ/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 2 14 TO 2 1 8 /PNJ/2015. 4) ITA NOS. 2 1 9 TO 2 23 /PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MRS. SADHANA R. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 49 /CIT(A) - VI/BLOR E/2014 - 15 & 1 29 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 51 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 31 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 54 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 34 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 44 TO 4 8 /PNJ/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 2 1 9 TO 2 23 /PNJ/2015. 5 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 5) ITA NOS. 2 24 TO 2 28 /PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MR. UDAY A. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 56 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE /2014 - 15 & 1 36 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 58 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 38 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 61 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 41 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 4 9 TO 53 /PNJ/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 2 24 TO 2 28 /PNJ/2015. 6) ITA NOS. 2 2 9 TO 2 33 /PNJ/2015 ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF MRS. SMITA U. KAMAT IN ITA NO. 6 3 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/ 2014 - 15 & 1 43 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 AND ITA NO. 65 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 45 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15 TO ITA NO. 6 8 /CIT(A) - VI/BLORE/2014 - 15 & 1 48 /CIT(A)/PNJ - 2/2014 - 15, ALL DT. 28.1.2015 FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 & 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 RESPECTIVELY AND CO NOS. 54 TO 5 8 /PNJ/2015 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPEALS OF REVENUE BEING ITA NOS. 2 2 9 TO 2 33 /PNJ/2015. 7 . SHRI MIHIR NANIWADEKAR, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES AND SHRI K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 8 . AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR THAT IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 201 1 - 1 2 THE ASSESSEES HAVE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 2 OF THE CROSS OBJECTIONS A CHALLENGE AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THE ORDER PASSED U/S 153C OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT HE DID NOT WISH TO PRESS THE SAID GROUND. CONSEQUENTLY, GROUND NO. 2 IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08, 2009 - 1 0 TO 201 1 - 1 2 STANDS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 9 . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMISSION BY THE LD. AR THAT THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS WAS IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THIS WAS FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S BEING A.YS 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 TO 201 1 - 1 2 . ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 (REVENUES APPEALS) : 10 . IN THE REVENUES APPEALS, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH ARE COMMON IN ALL THE REVENUES APPEALS : 1. THE LD. CIT(A) - 2, PANAJI HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E) HOLDING THAT SINCE NO MONETARY BENEFITS HAS ARISEN TO THE INDIVIDUAL SHARE HOLDERS AND THEREFORE, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22)(E) CANNOT BE INVOKED. 2. THE LD. CIT( A) - 2, PANAJI HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 2(22)(E) IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THERE SHOULD BE ANY MONETARY BENEFIT TO THE INDIVIDUAL SHAREHOLDERS. 3. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE AGITATED DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 2, PANAJI MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO RESTORED. 11 . IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH IN THE PREMISES OF M/S. KAMAT CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. ON 31.1.2012. IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH VARIOUS DOCUMENTS, CASH AND JEWELLERY WERE FOUND. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153C OF THE ACT IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEES, WHO WERE THE SHAREHOLDERS IN M/S. KAMAT CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., AS IT WAS NOTICED THAT M/S. KAMAT CONSTRUC TIONS PVT. LTD. HAD RECEIVED AMOUNTS NOT IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OR TRADE RELATED TRANSACTIONS FROM VARIOUS OTHER CONCERNS WHERE THE ASSESSEES HEREIN W ERE ALSO THE SHAREHOLDERS, THE AO HAD INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT AND HAD BROUGH T TO TAX DEEMED DIVIDEND. 7 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN RESPECT OF THE DEEMED DIVIDEND. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN ORDER RUNNING INTO NEARLY 82 PAGES, H IS FINDINGS IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUE OF DEEMED DIVIDEND , BY WHICH HE HAS DELETED THE SAID ADDITION , AT PAGE 78 OF HIS ORDER I S JUST TWO PARAGRAPHS TOTALLING TO 10 LINES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASON FOR DELETING THE AD DITIONS NOR HAS HE POINTED OUT THE ERROR IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 12 . IN REPLY, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE RIGHT FROM PAGE 75 OF HIS ORDER. HE FURTHER DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 76 OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO SUBMI T THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONCIS E D THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO AND THEREFORE IT SHOULD BE PRESUMED THAT IS AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS OF THE ASSESSEES C ASE , THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED THE RELIEF. HE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 13 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SHOWS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXTRACTED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE, THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE SO CALLED PAGE 76 WHICH IS FURTHER ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AND AT PAGE 75 , THE EXTRACT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT(A)S FINDINGS ON THE ISSUE, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE LD. DR, IS ONLY AT PAGE 78 IN TWO PARAGRAPHS CUMULATIVELY RUNNING INTO 10 LINES WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS : I FIND, FACTS OF THE CASE DISCUSSED ABOVE, IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE INSTANT CASE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, NO MONETARY BENEFIT HAS ARISEN TO THE INDIVIDUAL SHAREHOLDERS AND THEREFORE, PROVISIONS OF S. 2(22)(E) CAN NOT BE INVOKED. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF ITO VS S.S. BARODAWALA, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH B [1983] 4 ITD 186 ( BOM) WHEREIN SIMILAR DECISION HAS BEEN GIVEN. 8 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 THUS, APPRECIATING OVERALL FACTS OF THE CASE AND LEGAL PROVISIONS AND PLACING RELIANCE ON JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS DISCUSSED ABOVE, IN MY OPINION, THERE WAS NO NEED TO MAKE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S 2(22)(E) IN CASE OF THE APPELLANTS. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE APPELLANTS ARE ALLOWED ACCORDINGLY. HOWEVER, WHEN HE ADJUDICATED THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS IN RESPECT OF CHALLENGE TO THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153C R.W.S. 143(3 ) OF THE ACT, HE HAS PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER. IN ANY CASE, THAT PORTION OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS NOT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF CHALLENGE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, WE W ONT GO INTO THAT. HERE, WE MAY ALSO MENTION THAT AGAINST THE SAID ISSUE , THOUGH THE ASSESSEES HAVE RAISED GROUNDS IN THEIR CROSS OBJECTIONS, T HEY HAVE WITHDRAWN THE SAME AND, THEREFORE, THEY HAVE BEEN DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN AS MENTIONED EARLIER. 14. AT THE OUTSET, WHAT MUST BE SAID HERE IS THAT A SPEAKING ORDER IS AN ORDER THAT SP EAKS FOR ITSELF. THE ORDER SHOULD STAND THE TEST OF LEGALITY, FAIRNESS AND REASON AT HIGHER APPELLATE FORUMS I.E. THE ORDER SHOULD CONTAIN ALL THE DETAILS OF THE ISSUE, CLEAR FINDING AND A REASONED ORDER. A NON - SPEAKING ORDER IS VERY UNJUST IN THAT ONE D OES NOT KNOW THE REASON FOR THE JUDGEMENT AND WHAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE LEARNED COURT IN ARRIVING AT THE DECISION. A PERUSAL OF THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), AS HAS BEEN EXTRACTED EARLIER, CLEARLY SHOWS THAT IT IS A NON - SPEAKING ORDER. HOW THE LD . CIT(A) HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT IS NOT COMING OUT OF THE ORDER. THE AO, HAS IN FACT, BROUGHT OUT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIM THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEES. HOW THE FINDINGS OF THE AO WERE ERRONEOUS OR UNJUSTIFIED HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED, MUCH LESS ADDRESSED OR TOUCHED UPON BY THE LD. CIT(A). IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS WE ARE UNABLE TO READ THE MIND OF THE LD. CIT( A) AS TO THE VERY FOUNDATION ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE HAS DELETED THE ADDITION, THE ISSUE OF DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT IS RESTORED TO THE 9 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEES AND THE AO ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CASE AND TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE AO AND THE ASSESSEES. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 1 5 . IN REGARD TO THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 AND 2009 - 10 TO 201 1 - 1 2 , AS THE ASSESSEES HAVE WITHDRAWN THEIR GROUND IN REGARD TO CHALLENGE TO THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 153C R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSMENT THEREOF, THE SAID GROUND STANDS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. A S THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISED IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FOR THE A.YS 2007 - 08 AND 2009 - 10 TO 2012 - 13 ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), AND AS WE HAVE ALREADY RESTORED THE ISSUE OF DEEMED DIVIDEND TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION AND PASSING A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER, THE SAID GROUND RAISED IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND SAME ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 1 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES STAND DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 3 /08/2015. SD/ - (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 1 3 /08/ 201 5 *SSL* 10 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT S (I) RAMESH ANANT KAMAT, (II) DATTAPRASAD KAMAT , (III) ANJALI DATTAPRASAD KAMAT, (IV) SADHANA RAMESH KAMAT, (V) UDAY KAMAT AND (VI) SMITA UDAY KAMAT (3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER , 11 ITA NOS. 204 TO 233/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 29 TO 58/PNJ/2015 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ORDER ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 13/08/2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 14/08/2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 14/08/2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 14/08/2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 14/08/2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13/08/2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 14/08/2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER