ACIT, CHENNAI V. Shri Late.A.R.Krishnamurthy, CHENNAI

ITA 1211/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64197 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 27-08-2012
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIRUDH RAI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SUNDARRAMAN F
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 147; 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1211/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002- 03 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE XIII, ROOM NO. 608, 6 TH FLOOR, 121 N.H. ROAD, CHENNAI 600 034. VS. SHRI LATE. A.R. KRISHNAMURTHY, L/R SHRI A.K. RAMKUMAR, AH 93, 8 TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 040. [PAN: AAFPK4632H] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A PPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIRUDH RAI, CI T RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SUNDARRAMAN, F.C.A. DATE OF HEARING : 27.08.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.08.2012 ORDER PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) XII, CHENNAI D ATED 15.02.2012 IN ITA NO. 145/2010-11 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 . SHRI ANIRUDH RAI, CIT REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI S . SUNDARRAMAN, F.C.A. REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DELET ING THE ADDITION OF NON- I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1211 211211 211/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 12 22 2 2 COMPETE FEE OF ` .1.00 CRORE RECEIVED FROM CITADEL AUROBINDO BIOTECH . LTD. WHICH WAS ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 3. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 6 DAYS FOR WHICH T HE REVENUE FILED PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONG WITH AFFIDA VIT. ON GOING THROUGH THE PETITION AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, WE FIND THAT THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE IN DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY 6 DAYS. THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND APPEAL IS ADMITTED. 4. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RE TURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 ON 05.11.2004 ADMITTING INC OME AT ` .6,65,924/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R EAD WITH SECTION 147 ON 31.12.2007 ACCEPTING THE INCOME RETURNED. LATER THE ASSESSMENT WAS SET ASIDE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX UNDER SECTI ON 263 ON 23.02.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WAS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE SINC E THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CONSIDER THE NON-COMPETE FEE RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSEE FOR TAXATION UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. PURSUAN T TO THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX UNDER SECTION 263, THE A SSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 263 OF THE ACT ON 07.12.2010 DETERMINING THE INCOME OF THE ASS ESSEE AT ` .1,06,65,920/-. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT, TH E ASSESSING OFFICER I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1211 211211 211/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 12 22 2 3 BROUGHT TO TAX THE NON-COMPETE FEE OF ` .1.00 CRORE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE TREATING IT AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 5. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DELETI NG THE ADDITION OF ` .1.00 CRORE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. THE REVENUE FILED APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DELETING THE A DDITION OF ` .1.00 CRORE MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX UNDER SECTION 263. 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 496 /MDS/2010 DATED 24.02.2012 HAD QUASHED THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT. A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL WAS PLACED ON RECORD. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT SINCE TH IS TRIBUNAL HAD QUASHED THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PASSED UNDER SECTION 263, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, WHICH ARISES FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN CONSEQUENT TO TH E ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 BECAME INFRUCTUOUS. 8. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE COORDINATE BEN CH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HAD QUASHED THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1211 211211 211/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 12 22 2 4 INCOME TAX PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 AS RIGHTLY SAID BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSMENT MADE IN CONSEQUENT TO THE O RDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. THER EFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON TUESDAY, THE 27 TH AUGUST, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE - PRESIDENT (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 27.08.2012 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.