ITO, Chandigarh V. Mr. Avinash Singh Grewal, Chandigarh

ITA 1020/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7054 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTI KUMARI
• Assessee Lawyers: J B BHASIN
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1020/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 I.T.O. WARD 5(1) V AVINASH SINGH GREWAL CHANDIGARH PROP. M/S AVI AUTOS SCO 59, 2 ND FLOOR SECTOR 26, CHANDIGARH ACFPG 8979B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SMT. JYOTI KUMARI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI J.B. BHA SIN DATE OF HEARING 12.8.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15.9.2014 O R D E R PER T.R. SOOD, A.M THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17. 7.2012 OF THE LD CIT(A), CHANDIGARH. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS: 1 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS . 34,26,408/- MADE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3 AT THE OUTSET THE LD. D.R FOR THE REVENUE POINTED OUT EXACTLY IDENTICAL ISSUE CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION O F THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN EARLIER ASSESSME NT YEAR WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 460/CHD/2008 AND OTHERS VIDE ORDER DATED 10.6.2014. THEREFORE THE ISSUES ARE COVERED BY THE ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 2 4 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 5 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULL Y AND FIND THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE CAME UP FOR THE CONSIDER ATION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN EARLIER ASSESSME NT YEAR IN ITA NO. 460/CHD/2008 AND OTHERS (SUPRA). THE ISSUE WAS ADJUDICATED VIDE PARA 10 TO 12 OF THAT ORDER WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 10 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFU LLY. AS NOTED EARLIER THE TRIBUNAL IN EARLIER ROUND DECIDED THIS ISSUE AGAINST THE REVENUE AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA WHICH HAS B EEN ADJUDICATED BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN ITA NO. 162 OF 2009 WHICH HA S BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 9.9.2013. AFTER NOTING FACTS VIDE PARA 2 OF THIS ORDER THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS D ECIDED THE ISSUE VIDE PARA 3 TO 6 WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 3 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAD RELIED UPO N THE DECISION IN KARANBIR SINGHS CASE (SUPRA) AGAINST WHICH SLP WAS FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. THE HON'BLE APEX COURT REMA NDED THE MATTER TO THIS COURT FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL AFRESH IN VIEW O F THE JUDGMENT IN CIT V GHANSHYAM (SUPRA). LD. COUNSEL RELIED UPON SUBSEQU ENT DECISIONS OF THIS COURT IN ITA NO. 283 OF 2006, CIT, FARIDABAD V KARANBIR SINGH L/H OF LATE SHRI KHUSHI RAM DECIDED ON 24.8.2010, CIT V SMT. BURFI, ITA NO. 356 OF 2007 DECIDED ON 1.9.2010 AND CIT V BIR SINGH (HUF) ITA NO. 209 OF 2004, DECIDED ON 27.10.2010 TO SUBMIT THAT THE M ATTER MAY BE DECIDED AFRESH KEEPING IN VIEW THE LATEST POSITION OF LAWS. 4 WE HAVE HEARD LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT-REVEN UE. NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE. 5 THIS COURT IN KARANBIR SINGHS CASE (SUPRA) ALLOW ED THE APPEAL WHILE ANSWERING THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION O F THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN GHANSHAYAMS CASE (SUPRPA). SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN EXPRESSED IN SMT. BURFI AND BIR SINGHS CASES (SUPRA). 6 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.10.2008, ANNEXURE P.3 PASSED BY THE TRIBUN AL IS SET ASIDE AND THE CASE IS REMANDED TO THE TRIBUNAL FOR DECIDING T HE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PARTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ABOVE ORDER ITSELF SHOWS THAT THE DECISION OF K ARANBIR SINGH (SUPRA) RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT EARLIER WAS REVE RSED LATER ON BECAUSE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAD REMANDED THIS IS SUE TO THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF CIT V GHANSH YAM (HUF) (SUPRA). SIMILAR ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE IN C ASE OF CIT V SMT. PARKASH KAUR AND OTHERS, 330 ITR 332 AND CIT V SMT. BURFI, 331 ITR 1. IN BOTH THESE CASES IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT INTEREST PORTION IS TAXABLE ON RECEIPT BASIS. 11 ON THE BASIS OF ABOVE BACKGROUND, HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ALLOWED REVENUES APPEAL EVEN IN CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WHICH BECOMES ABSOLUTELY C LEAR FROM PARA 5 3 AND AT THE COST OF REPETITION WE AGAIN REPRODUCE PA RA 5 WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 6 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.10.2008, ANNEXURE P.3 PASSED BY THE TRIBUN AL IS SET ASIDE AND THE CASE IS REMANDED TO THE TRIBUNAL FOR DECIDING T HE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PARTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 12 DESPITE OF ABOVE OBSERVATION THE COURT HAS REMAN DED THE MATTER BACK TO THE TRIBUNAL FOR AFFORDING AFRESH OPPORTUNI TY WHICH WAS GRANTED AND THE CASE HAS BEEN HEARD AGAIN. FROM RELEVANT M ATERIAL ON RECORD IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE ENTI TLED TO INTEREST AND THAT THE ORDER HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY HON'BLE HIGH C OURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AND EVEN SLP FILED BY OTHER PARTY AGAINST THIS ORDER, WAS DISMISSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AND THEREFO RE IT BECOMES ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO R ECEIVE INTEREST ON FDRS. THE SAME ARE TO BE TAXED ON THE BASIS OF RE CEIPT. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MISDIRECTED HIMSELF IN ALLOWING RELIEF T O THE ASSESSEE. THIS HAS BEEN DONE PERHAPS BECAUSE THE BENEFIT OF THE DE CISION OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN CASE OF ASSESSEE ITSELF IN ITA NO. 162 OF 2009 WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE LD. CIT(A). T HEREFORE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO T HE ASSESSING OFFICER BY HOLDING THAT INTEREST HAS TO BE TAXED ON THE BAS IS OF RECEIPT OF THE SAME. FOLLOWING THE ABOVE ORDER WE DECIDE THE ISSUES RAIS ED IN THIS APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 6 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.9.2014 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15.9.2014 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR