DCIT(CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE V. SHRI KHEDAPATI INFRAESTATE PVT. LTD., INDORE

MA 10/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT), Central-1, Indore, as the appellant, and M/s Shri Khedapati Infraestate Pvt. Ltd, as the respondent. The Revenue filed a Miscellaneous Application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to restore their appeals which were previously dismissed by the ITAT due to the low tax effect, below the threshold of 60 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 05/2024. The Tribunal had initially dismissed the appeals without discussing the merits. However, upon the Revenue's application citing the case falls under the exception clause related to accommodation entries, the Tribunal agreed to restore the appeals for a detailed examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716994 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH PORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S ASHISH GOYAL; N. D
• Keywords: Set aside; Tax effect; Search and seizure; Accommodation entries; Penny stocks; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 132; 153A

Judgement Text

" Page 1 of 8 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर Ɋायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A No.09 to 11/Ind/2025 (AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15) DCIT, Central-1, Indore बनाम/ Vs. M/s Shri Khedapati Infraestate Pvt. Ltd, 39, Shraddha Nand Marg, Chhawani, Indore (PAN:AAQCS0822F) (Revenue) (Respondent) Assessee by S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, DR Date of Hearing 08.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M: The revenue has filed a Miscellaneous Applications in terms of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for brevity) before this Tribunal bearing MA Nos. 9 to 11/Ind/2025for the purpose of restoring their appeals bearing ITA Nos. ITA(SS) 48 to 50/Ind/2024 which was disposed off by this Tribunal vide order dated 18.09.2024 as Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 2 of 8 dismissed. In para 5 & 6 of ITAT order dated 18.09.2024 it was recorded as under:- 5. हमने दोनɉ और क े ͪव ɮवान ĤǓतǓनͬधयɉ क े Ǔनवेदनɉ पर ͪवचार ͩकया है तथा अͧभलेख पर उपलÞध सामĒी का अÚययन ͩकया है। हमने पाया ͩक क Ʌ ġȣय Ĥ×य¢ कर बोड[ ɮवारा पǐरपğ सं. 9/2024 Ǒदनांक 17.09.2024 क े ɮवारा अͬधकरण क े सम¢ अपील दाͨखल करने हेतु अंतĒ[èत ͪवǓनǑहत कर सीमा को संशोͬधत कर 60 लाख ͩकया गया है। हमने पाया ͩक आ¢ेͪपत Ĥकरणɉ मɅ ͪववादाधीन मु ɮदɉ मɅ कर Ĥभाव Đमशः ǽ. 52,54,116/-, ǽ. 51,22,853/- तथा ǽ. 26,43,937/- है जो सीबीडीटȣ ɮवारा अͬधकरण क े सम¢ अपील दाͨखल करने हेतु ͪवǓनǑहत सीमा ǽ. 60 लाख से कम है। अतः पǐरपğ क े अनुसार राजèव को इन अपीलɉ पर दबाव डालना अपेͯ¢त नहȣं है। तɮ नुसार ͪवभाग ɮवारा दाͨखल वत[मान अपीले खाǐरज करने योÊय है। अतः, हम राजèव ɮवारा दाͨखल अपीलɉ को Ĥकरण क े गुणागुण पर ͪवचार ͩकए ǒबना आरंभतः खाǐरज करते हɇ। यɮयͪप, Ûयायोͬचत Ǻिçट से यहाँ यह èपçट ͩकया जाता है ͩक राजèव ͪवͪवध आवेदन (एमए) दाͨखल करने क े ͧलए èवतंğ है यǑद ये Ĥकरण अपवाद खंड (exception clause) क े अधीन आते हɇ। 6. पǐरणामतः, राजèव कȧ अपीले खाǐरज कȧ जाती हɇ। 2. The revenue’s aforesaid M.A. No. 9 to 11/Ind/2025 is reproduced below:- MA Nos. 9 to 11/Ind/2025 Name of the Assessee : M/s Shri Khedapati Infraestate Pvt.Ltd, 39 Shraddha Nand Marg, Chawani, Indore Status : Company PAN : AAQCS0822F A.Ys : 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 Miscellaneous Application u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 3 of 8 The assessee is a domestic company of the JRG Group which was formed with the main object of acquisition, development of land. A Search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"The Act\") was carried out on 12/01/2021 at various premises of concerns/entities/associates of JRG Group by the Investigation Wing, Indore. During the said search operation, the assessee was also covered u/s 132 of the Act. Assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act was passed for the A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2020- 21 and u/s 143(3) of the Act for the A.Y. 2021-22. The return Income & assessed income for the A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2021-22 is as under: A.Y. Return Income (in Rs.) Assessed Income (in Rs.) 2012-13 Rs. (-) 18,600/- Rs. 1,61,75,320/- 2013-14 Rs. (-) 19,106/- Rs. 1,57,70,240/ 2014-15 Rs. (-) 24,710/- Rs. 85,31,720/- 2015-16 Rs. (-) 16,033/- Rs. 1,95,77,010/- 2016-17 Rs. 2,46,270/- Rs. 2,55,28,620/- 2017-18 Rs. 2,77,110/- Rs. 30,58,340/- 2018-19 Rs. 3,31,680/- Rs. 31,76,360/- 2019-20 Rs. 3,46,440/- Rs. 29,47.719/ 2020-21 Rs. 3,55,220/- Rs. 29,74,900/- 2021-22 Rs. 4,06,940/- Rs. 4,06,940/- 2. Aggrieved with the order, the assessee has preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). The present appeal order is related to A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2014-15. The Ld. CIT (A) passed the order of Appeal No.CIT(A)-3, Bhopal/IT.10124/2011-12, 10311/2012-13, and 10478/2013-14 on 08.02.2024. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the AO was not justified in assuming Jurisdiction over the extended assessment year of search period i.e. 7th to 9th year and making Impugned additions. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the entire additions made in A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Against the Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 4 of 8 order of Ld. CIT(A), in appeal no. IT-10124/2011-12,10311/2012- 13 and 10478/2013-14 on 08/02/2024, the Revenue filed second appeal before the ITAT, Indore Bench Indore. 3-The Hon'ble ITAT vide order dated 23.09.2024 decided the appeal holding that: 5. हमने दोनɉ और क े ͪव ɮवान ĤǓतǓनͬधयɉ क े Ǔनवेदनɉ पर ͪवचार ͩकया है तथा अͧभलेख पर उपलÞध सामĒी का अÚययन ͩकया है। हमने पाया ͩक क Ʌ ġȣय Ĥ×य¢ कर बोड[ ɮवारा पǐरपğ सं. 9/2024 Ǒदनांक 17.09.2024 क े ɮवारा अͬधकरण क े सम¢ अपील दाͨखल करने हेतु अंतĒ[èत ͪवǓनǑहत कर सीमा को संशोͬधत कर 60 लाख ͩकया गया है। हमने पाया ͩक आ¢ेͪपत Ĥकरणɉ मɅ ͪववादाधीन मु ɮदɉ मɅ कर Ĥभाव Đमशः ǽ. 52,54,116/-, ǽ. 51,22,853/- तथा ǽ. 26,43,937/- है जो सीबीडीटȣ ɮवारा अͬधकरण क े सम¢ अपील दाͨखल करने हेतु ͪवǓनǑहत सीमा ǽ. 60 लाख से कम है। अतः पǐरपğ क े अनुसार राजèव को इन अपीलɉ पर दबाव डालना अपेͯ¢त नहȣं है। तɮ नुसार ͪवभाग ɮवारा दाͨखल वत[मान अपीले खाǐरज करने योÊय है। अतः, हम राजèव ɮवारा दाͨखल अपीलɉ को Ĥकरण क े गुणागुण पर ͪवचार ͩकए ǒबना आरंभतः खाǐरज करते हɇ। यɮयͪप, Ûयायोͬचत Ǻिçट से यहाँ यह èपçट ͩकया जाता है ͩक राजèव ͪवͪवध आवेदन (एमए) दाͨखल करने क े ͧलए èवतंğ है यǑद ये Ĥकरण अपवाद खंड (exception clause) क े अधीन आते हɇ। 6. पǐरणामतः, राजèव कȧ अपीले खाǐरज कȧ जाती हɇ। 4 Accordingly, the Hon'ble ITAT has decided the appeal stating that tax effect is less than 60 lacs in the case and held that appeal of the Department is dismissed without considering the issue on merits. However, Hon'ble ITAT has further stated that the Department is free to file Miscellaneous Application against the order if the case is covered under an exceptional clause. 5. In the above regard, it is submitted: a) That, for all AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15, the case falls under the exception clause(s), including point 3.1(h) of the CBDT's Circular Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 5 of 8 No. 05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 as the tax evasion in the case is made through accommodation entries. b) Point 3.1 (h) of the aforesaid CBDT Circular reads as under: \"Cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain / loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries\" c) That, for all AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15, the case falls under the exception clause(s), especially point 3.1(h) of the CBDT's Circular No. 05/2024 dated 15.03.2024, is evident from the Questions / Grounds filed before the Hon'ble ITAT as well as the Assessment Order. The orders us/ 253(2) for the three AYs 2012-13 to 2014- 15 are herewith annexed with this MA, which clearly evidences this aspect. Same is also evidenced from the perusal of the Assessment Order. d) That, at the time of filing of Department's appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, the tax effect was below the relevant monetary limit for filing of appeal before ITAT for AY 2012-13 to 2014-15, the tax effect was below the monetary limit. e) That, for AY 2014-15, It was clearly mentioned in the order u/s 253(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22/04/2024 that 'Certified that this case falls under the exception clause(s), Including point 3.1(h) of the CBDT's Circular No. 05/2024 dated 15.03.2024. This is because the tax evasion in the case is made through accommodation entries. f) The Hon'ble ITAT dismissed the appeal of the department stating that the tax effect was less than 60 lacs. Accordingly, the appeal of the department has been dismissed without discussion and decision on merit. 6. Accordingly, in view of the facts on record, mainly that the case falls under the exception clause(s), including point 3.1(h) of the CBDT's Circular No. 05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 as the tax evasion in the case is made through accommodation entries, it is prayed that there is mistake apparent from the record. Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 6 of 8 7. Therefore, it is prayed that the Hon'ble ITAT may kindly decide the Appeal on merits. Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar Jha) Dy. Commissioner of Income tax Central Circle-1, Indore 3. The hearing in the above Miscellaneous Applications took place before this Tribunal on 08.08.2025 when Ld. DR appeared for and on behalf of the Revenue and interalia contended that their appeal bearing No. 48 to 53/Ind/2024 be restored in terms of Section 254(2) of the Act as there is a mistake apparent in the ITAT order dated 18.09.2024. It was urged by him that appeals falls under exception clause of para 3.1(h) of CBDT Circular No.05/2024 dated 15.03.2024 where cases falling under category “accommodation entries” are not covered. He placed reliance on grounds of appeals as per Form 36 and so also on impugned assessment order in support of his contentions. It was prayed that ITAT, Indore order dated 18.09.2024 be amended/modified and their appeals be restored back. Ld. AR fairly concurred with the views expressed by the Ld. DR. Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 7 of 8 4. In view of the aforesaid we find that this Tribunal vide their order dated 18.09.2024 had dismissed the revenue appeals on ground of low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 on ground of low tax effect as threshold limit was below 60 lakhs. However liberty was given to the Revenue that they are at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application if they desire so upon coming to their knowledge that case falls under any exception clause of CBDT Circulars (supra). Now the Revenue by aforesaid Miscellaneous Application has pointed out that their appeals falls under clause 3.1(h) of CBDT Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 as the case pertains to accommodation entries. The mistake is therefore apparent perse. We have perused the grounds of appeal and impugned assessment order and we agree with the submissions made by Ld. DR. Therefore upon finding the mistake which is apparent we amend and modify the ITAT order dated 18.09.2024 and accordingly we set aside the same. In consequences thereof ITA Appeal No. 48 to 50/Ind/2024 are restored back for final hearing and disposal. The registry is directed to give fresh date to the parties as and by way of fresh notice. Printed from counselvise.com DCIT Central-1 v/s Shri KhedapatiInfraestate Pvt.Ltd MA Nos.09 to 11/Ind/2025 - A.Ys.2012-13 to 2014-15 Page 8 of 8 5. In result, Miscellaneous Application of Revenue is allowed, with no order as to cost. Order pronounced in open court on 18.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore िदनांक / Dated : 18.08.2025 Dev/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "