Shri Deepak Lakhmichand Ahuja, Aurangabad V. Pr. Commissioner of Income tax -1, Aurangabad

ITA 1180/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2818 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NANDITA KANCHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: POOJA INDANI
• Keywords: Assessment record; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO.1180/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 SHRI DEEPAK LAKHMICHAND AHUJA, UDYAN ROAD, PAITHAN, AURANGABAD 431 107. PAN : AAPPA5497A. . / APPELLANT V/S THE PR.C OMMISSIONER OF IN COME - TAX 1, AURANGABAD. . / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MS. POOJA INDANI. REVENUE BY : SMT. NANDITA KANCHAN. / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE ORDER OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, AURANGABAD DATED 14.03.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON R ECORD ARE AS UNDER :- ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO ELECTRONICALLY FILED HIS RETURN O F INCOME FOR A.Y. 2012-13 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.13,15,2 84/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER ASSESSME NT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DT.20.03.2015 AND THE TOT AL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.14,41,217/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, LD. PCIT ON E XAMINING / DATE OF HEARING : 07.06.2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11.06.2019 2 ITA NO.1180/PUN/2017 THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS NOTED THAT DURING THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS, THE AO HAS FAILED TO CALL FOR THE DETAILS NOTED IN THE ORDER PAS SED U/S 263 OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO WAS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. HE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF AO AND GAVE THE DIRECTIONS TO CALL FOR THE REQUISITE DETAILS, EXAMINE IT AFRESH AND PASS ORDERS. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. PCIT VIDE ORDER DATED 14.03.2017, ASSESSEE IS NOW IN A PPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. APPELLANT HAS GIVEN PARA WISE REPLY TO THE NOTI CE U/S 263 . 2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER ERRED TO GIVE THE FINDING S THAT HOW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS ERRONEOUS & PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE? 3. IN THE APPELLANT'S CASE THE AO HAS PASSED THE OR DER BY MAKING ALL THE INQUIRIES & VERIFICATION WHICH A REASONABLE & PRUDE NT OFFICER SHALL HAVE CARRIED OUT IN SUCH CASES. 4. THE NOTICE U/S 263 WAS ISSUED ON 02.03.2017, REC EIVED ON 03 . 03.2017 & CALLED THE REPLY ON 07.03 . 2017 & ORDER PASSED ON 14.03 . 2017 . 04.03 . 2017 & 05.03.2017 WAS WEEKLY OFF . PRACTICALLY COMMISSIONER HAS NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT TIME TO THE APPELLANT. IS IT TR EATED AS A JUDICIAL ORDER? HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED WITH ORDER APPEAL IS FILED BE FORE HONOURABLE ITAT SEEING RELIEF TO QUASH THE ORDER U/S 263. 5. IN NARAYAN TATU RANE V . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 27(1)(1) , MUMBAI ITAT, TRIBUNAL HAS NOTICED THAT THE LD. PRO CIT CAN REVISE THE ORDER ONLY IF IT IS SHOWN BY FINDINGS WITH REASONS THAT THE ASSES SMENT ORDER IS ERRONEOUS IN SO FAR AS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. 6. FOR THAT IN THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER U/S 263 IS MERELY CHANGE IN OPINION . THE ORDER U/S 143(3) PASSED BY THE LD . ASSESSING OFFICER DOES NOT IN ANY WAY REPRESENT ERR ONEOUS ORDER. THE ACTION OF LD. CIT WAS WHOLLY UNREASONABLE, UNCALLED FOR & BAD IN LAW. 7. YOU ARE REQUESTED TO QUASH THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSI ONERS ORDER UNDER 263 AND GRANT THE RELIEF. 8. APPELLANT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD IN PERSON. 3. ALL THE GROUNDS BEING INTER-CONNECTED ARE CONSIDERED TOGETHE R. 4. BEFORE US, LD.A.R. SUBMITTED THAT CONSEQUENT TO THE OR DER PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT BY LD. PCIT, AO PASSED CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER U/S 3 ITA NO.1180/PUN/2017 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE ACT BY VIDE ORDER DT.29.12.2017 AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.2 LAKHS. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSES SEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 09.07.201 8 (IN APPEAL NO.ABD/CIT(A)-1/262/2017-18 DT.20.01.2019) DELETED THE A DDITION OF RS. 2 LAKHS MADE BY THE AO. AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), REVENUE HAS NOT PREFERRED ANY APPEAL BEFORE ITAT. LD.A.R. THEREFOR E SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE IN THE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER PASSED UNDER SEC.143(3) R.W.S 263 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DELETED BY LD.CIT (A) AND HAS ATTAINED FINALITY. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE REMAINS NO GRIEV ANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE CAN BE CONSIDERED TO BE ACADEMIC AND THUS IT CAN BE DECIDED AC CORDINGLY. LD. D.R. DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD.A.R. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT ORIGINALLY ASSE SSMENT ORDER WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, THE LD. PCIT PASSED ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT WHEREIN LD. PCIT DIRECTED THE AO TO CALL FOR TH E DETAILS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER, EXAMINE IT AFRESH AND PASS ORDERS. CONSEQUENTLY, ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE ACT WHEREIN ADDITION OF RS.2 LAKHS WAS MADE BY THE AO. WHEN T HE MATTER WAS CARRIED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD.CIT(A), LD.CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DT.09.07.2018 HAS DELETED THE ADDITION AND AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD.CIT(A), NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE MEANING THEREBY THAT THE ISSUE FOR WHICH REVISIONARY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIA TED HAD BEEN DECIDED IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE RE IS NO GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 263 OF TH E ACT HAS BEEN RENDERED ACADEMIC AND THUS THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 4 ITA NO.1180/PUN/2017 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 11 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019. SD/- SD/- ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER '! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 11 TH JUNE, 2019. YAMINI #$%&'('% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. 4. 5. THE PCT-1, PUNE. '#$ %%&',) &', / DR, ITAT, B PUNE; $*+,/ GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // -./%0&1 / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) &', / ITAT, PUNE.