Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad V. Devasani China Govinda Reddy (HUF), Hyderabad

ITA 1016/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2784 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-12-2021
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Section: 143(3); 153C; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1016/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD VS SRI DEVASANI CHINA GOVINDA REDDY (HUF), HYDERABAD [PAN: AAHHP6622G] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : SHRI ROHIT MUJUMDAR, DR FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM, AR DATE OF HEARING : 23-09-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26-10-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : THIS REVENUES APPEAL FOR AY.2011-12 ARISES FROM THE CIT(A)-11, HYDERABADS ORDER DATED 25-03-2019 PASSED IN CASE NO.190 / 2014-15 / 2016-17 / CIT(A)-11 / HYD, INVOL VING PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ IN SHORT, THE ACT]. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE REVENUE RAISES THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIVE GROUN DS: 1.THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN ALLOWING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 1016/HYD/2019 :- 2 -: 2.THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THE TYPE OF SCRUTI NY AS 'LIMITED' WITHOUT GETTING THE FACTS VERIFIED FROM THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER WHILE THE TYPE OF SCRUTINY IS 'COMPLETE' WHICH IS EVIDENT FRO M THE RECORDS. 3.THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT RESTRICTED TO EXAMINE THE SPECIFIC I SSUE ONLY WHICH IS MENTIONED AS REASON FOR SCRUTINY SELECTION UNDER CA SS, IF THE TYPE OF SCRUTINY IS 'COMPLETE'. 4.THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLETELY DISCHARGED THE ONUS ON HIM TO FU RNISH THE INFORMATION AS CALLED FOR BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY, WHICH FORCED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASS ESS THE INCOME BASED ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORDS. 5.THE LD.(CIT)(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FAC T THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS OFFERED SOME PART OF AGRICULTURAL INCOM E AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IN HIS RETURNS SUBSEQUENTLY FILED U/S .153C, THE BASIS OF WHICH HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED WITH ANY MATERIAL EVID ENCE WHICH GOES TO SHOW THAT THERE MUST BE SOME INFIRMITIES IN THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME BEING SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS ORIGINAL RETURNS . THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CORRECT IN ESTIMATING THE AGRI CULTURAL INCOME BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ANY GROUND OR ADD ANY OTHER GROUNDS WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 3. THE REVENUES FIRST AND FOREMOST CONTENTION IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN TREATING THE I MPUGNED SCRUTINY ON LIMITED BASIS ONLY THAN A COMPLETE ON E WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FOLLOWED ALL DUE PROCESS TO THIS EFFECT. THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND HAS SUPPORTED THE CIT( A)S IMPUGNED LOWER APPELLATE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSMENT HEREIN AS A LIMITED SCRUTINY THEREBY HOLDING THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO HAVE ADDED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND UNEXPLA INED CASH CREDITS OF RS.36,84,850/- AND RS.1,82,75,946/-; RESPECTIVELY. MR.RAGHURAM NEXT SOUGHT TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT THE REVENUE NOWHERE SEEKS TO REVIVE THE FOREGOING L ATTER ADDITION IN ITS GROUNDS AS WELL. ITA NO. 1016/HYD/2019 :- 3 -: 4. WE FIND NO MERIT IN ASSESSEES ARGUMENTS. WE NOTE FROM REVENUES PAPER BOOK (PAGE 1) THAT THE ASSESSMENT HE REIN WAS INDEED COMPULSORY AND COMPLETE THAN ONLY A LIMITE D ONE. THE CIT(A) HAS NOWHERE CONSIDERED THIS CLINCHING FAC T WHICH QUASHING THE SAME. COUPLED WITH THIS, THIS ASSESSMEN T ALSO INVOLVED SECTION 68 ADDITION OF RS.1,82,75,946/- (SUP RA). THE MERE FACT THAT THE REVENUE HAS NOT RAISED A SPECIFIC G ROUND BEFORE US DOES NOT IMPLY THAT IT NO MORE PRESSES THIS LA TTER ISSUE SINCE ITS ENDEAVOUR IS TO GET THE ASSESSMENT RESTOR ED ONLY. WE ACCORDINGLY ACCEPT THE REVENUES FOREGOING L EGAL GROUND TO HOLD THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN TREATING A COMPLETE SCRUTINY AS A LIMITED ONE ONLY. THE REVENUE SUCCEEDS IN THE INSTANT LEGAL PLEA/FORMER FOU R SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS. 5. COMING TO THE REVENUES FIFTH SUBSTANTIVE GROUND RAIS ING AGRICULTURAL INCOME ADDITION ISSUE (SUPRA), BOTH PARTI ES HAVE PRODUCED BEFORE US COPIES OF SECTION 143(3) R.W.S.15 3C ORDER DT.31-03-2016 AND CIT(A)S ORDER DT.25-03-2019 ADDING AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,40,000/- [AFTER GIVING CREDIT OF RS.14, 64,728/- AND RS.36,84,850/- (SUPRA)] IN 2 ND ROUND AND DELETED IN THE LATTER ORDER; RESPECTIVELY. SUFFICE TO SAY, THIS AGRICU LTURAL INCOME ADDITION IN SECTION 143(3) ASSESSMENT IN SEC. 153C ASSESSMENT OF RS.1,40,000/- WAS OVER AND ABOVE THAT M ADE IN REGULAR ASSESSMENT ONLY. IT WAS FURTHER NOT COVERED U/S .153C R.W.S.153A(2) OF THIS ACT AS WELL. FACED WITH THIS SITUATION, WE ACCEPT THE REVENUES INSTANT FIFTH SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN PRINCIPLE AND RESTO RE THE ITA NO. 1016/HYD/2019 :- 4 -: ISSUE BACK TO THE CIT(A) FOR HIS AFRESH ADJUDICATION. ALL THESE FIVE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THERE FORE. 6. THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 TH OCTOBER, 2021 \ SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.G ODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED: 26-10-2021 TNMM ITA NO. 1016/HYD/2019 :- 5 -: COPY TO : 1.DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2 ), HYDERABAD. 2.SRI DEVASANI CHINA GOVINDA REDDY (HUF), H.NO. 16-31-HIG/117, VI PHASE, KPHB COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-11, HYDERABAD. 4.PR.CIT-CENTRAL, HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.