LATE SHRI AFHAY KUMAR CHORA L/H SMT. CHANDANA CHOPRA, Ujjain V. THE ITO Ward , AGAR

ITA 107/Ind/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8007 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 107/IND/2018 A.Y. 2008-09 ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA L/H OF LATE SMT. CHANDANA CHOPRA, MAHIDPUR PAN ACZPC 8310 Q :: APPELLANT VS ITO, WARD, AGAR MALWA :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, CA RESPONDENT BY SHRI ASHISH PORWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 08.1.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09.1.2020 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF LD. CIT(A)-UJJAIN DATED 06.12.2017. 2. FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,58,096/- O N ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EXPENSES. FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE GROUND OF APPEAL ARE THAT THE SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 2 ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INC OME AT RS.2,80,580/- ON 30.9.2008. THE ASSESSING OFFICER P ASSED THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) ON 23.3.2010 DETERMININ G TOTAL INCOME AT RS.3,81,670/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISS UED AND INCOME AT RS.8,98,848/- WAS DETERMINED U/S 143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 08.10.2012 WHICH WAS CHALLENGED BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, THE MATTER WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITA T, INDORE AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 21.12.2015 RESTORED THE M ATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION NO T TO MAKE THE ADDITION IF THE TAX HAS BEEN PAID BY THE RECIPIENT OF THE IN TEREST. IN SECOND ROUND, THE ASSESSING OFFICER AGAIN MADE THE DISALLO WANCE AND THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION. THUS, THE ASSESSE E IS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. BEFORE ME, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SU BMITTED THAT EARLIER, THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 21.12.2015 R ESTORED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIF ICATION OF THE FACT THAT SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 3 THE INCOME OF INTEREST HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INTEREST RECIPIENTS IN THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR FOLLOWING TH E ORDER OF THE ITAT, INDORE BENCH IN CASE OF M/S. PRATIBHA EXIMS P . LTD. PASSED IN ITA NO.90/IND/2013. HOWEVER, IN THE SECOND ROUND, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ORDER DID NOT TAKE ANY RE FERENCE TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND PASSED THE ORDER BY HER OWN WIT HOUT KEEPING IN MIND THE DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT WHICH IS HIGHLY OBJ ECTIONABLE IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTRY. THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ULTIMATELY DECIDED THE MATTER WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND JUST FOLLOWED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF HER PREDECESSOR. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER NEEDS TO BE QUASHED ON THIS ISSUE . ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENU E AUTHORITIES BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE BY BRINGING ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL ON RECORD. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. ON CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE FACTS, I FIND THAT IN THE SECOND ROUND, THE A SSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ORDER DID NOT TAKE ANY REFERENCE TO THE ORDER OF THE SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 4 TRIBUNAL AND PASSED THE ORDER BY HER OWN WITHOUT KE EPING IN MIND THE DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT, WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE PASSED THE ORDER IN PURSUANCE OF THE DI RECTIONS ISSUED BY THE ITAT. BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE SAME, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEING VOID IS QUASHED ON THIS ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. SO FAR AS GROUND NO.2 IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF RS.59,382/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST INCOME IS CONCERNED, THE FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE GROUND OF APPEAL ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,35,000/- FROM M/S. RAJSHREE BUILDERS AND DEVEL OPERS ON WHICH A SUM OF RS.20,021/- TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. UNDE R FORM NO.16 ISSUED BY THE PARTY, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT A SUM OF RS.1,94,382/- WAS PROVIDED AS INTEREST TO THE ASSESSEE AND TAX ON THE SAME AMOUNT WAS DEDUCTED. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED A SUM OF RS.59,382/- (RS.1,94,382 RS.1,35,000) TOWARDS THE DIFFERENCE OF THE AMOUNT BETWEEN RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AN D AS PER FORM SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 5 NO.16. LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME ON THE BASIS O F MENTIONING IN THE FORM NO.16. 6. BEFORE ME, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECORDED ONLY THAT AMOUNT WHICH WAS INFORM ED BY M/S. RAJSHREE BUILDERS. THE ASSESSEE ONLY CAME TO KNOW A BOUT DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT AFTER RECEIVING FORM NO.16A FROM M/S. RAJSHREE BUILDERS. THE MISTAKE IS NOT DELIBERATE OR INTENTIO NAL AND THE ASSESSEE NEVER RECEIVED THE BALANCE AMOUNT FROM M/S. RAJSHRE E BUILDERS AND AS AND WHEN THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME SHALL BE SHOWN AS INCOME IN THE ACCOUNTS. THEREFORE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ADD ITION IS UNJUSTIFIED. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. ON CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE FACTS, I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE MISTAKE IS NOT DELIBERATE OR INT ENTIONAL AS THE ASSESSEE ONLY CAME TO KNOW ABOUT DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT AFTER RECEIVING FORM NO.16A FROM M/S. RAJSHREE BUILDERS A ND HE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE BALANCE AMOUNT FROM M/S. RAJSHREE BUIL DERS AND AS AND SMC ABHAY KUMAR CHOPRA ITA 107 OF 2018 6 WHEN THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME SHALL BE SHOWN AS INCOME IN THE ACCOUNTS, THER EFORE, THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT BE AGGRIEVED. LOOKING TO THIS FA CTUAL PLEA ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE, I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.59,382/-. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.2 R AISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ALLOWED. 8. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.1.202 0. SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 09.1.2020 !VYAS! COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PR.CIT(A)/PR.CIT/DR, INDORE