DCIT, CHENNAI V. S.Krishnakumari, CHENNAI

ITA 1238/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64109 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIRUDH RAI IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1237 & 1238(MDS)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2004-05 & 2007-08 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE III(2), CHENNAI. VS. SMT. S.KRISHNAKUMARI, 81, THIRUVALLUVAR SALAI, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI-18. PAN AALPK3557B. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIRUDH RAI, IRS, CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.SRIDHAR, A DVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 25 TH JULY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 TH AUGUST, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2004-05 AND 2007-08. THESE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-II AT CHENNAI, DATED 15-2-2011. THE - - ITA 1237 & 1238 OF 2011 2 APPEALS ARISE OUT OF THE ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED UNDE R SECTION 143(3), READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961. 2. IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE R EVENUE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) DELETING THE ADDITIONS OF ` 10,50,668/- RELATING TO UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE OF LAND; ` 9,59,495/- AGAIN RELATING TO PURCHASE OF ANOTHER PIECE OF LAND; ` 73,865/- TOWARDS ADDITIONAL STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION CHARGES AND ` 4,05,200/- TOWARDS PAYMENTS MADE TO BUILDERS. THERE IS ALSO ONE MORE GROUND RELATING TO THE DELETION OF ` 3,95,000/- ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT. 3. IN THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 T HE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER S OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DELETING VARIOU S ADDITIONS RELATING TO UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE OF GOLD AT ` 5,50,268/-; PURCHASE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES AT ` 47,31,645/- AND UNEXPLAINED CREDIT AT ` 4,50,000/-. 4. ALL THESE ITEMS OF ADDITIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE CONNECTED FILE RELATING TO SHRI P .SELVARAJ. THE - - ITA 1237 & 1238 OF 2011 3 ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APP EALS) IN THE CASE OF SHRI P.SELVARAJ HAVE ALREADY BEEN UPHEL D BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D-BENCH, CHENNAI THR OUGH THEIR ORDER DATED 3 RD AUGUST, 2012, PASSED IN ITA NOS.1230 TO 1236(MDS)/2012. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APP EALS) HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN THESE TWO FILES, RELYI NG ON THE RESULT OF ADJUDICATION REFLECTED IN THE CASE OF SHRI P.SEL VARAJ. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE FIND THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME- TAX(APPEALS) IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS ADJUDICATED BY THE REVENUE IN THESE APPEALS. 5. INCIDENTALLY, IT IS AGAIN TO BE MENTIONED HERE THAT THE REVENUE HAS ARGUED THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS) HAS DECIDED ALL THESE ISSUES WITHOUT C ALLING FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHEN EVIDE NCES WERE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS). THE VERY SAME ARGUMENT HAS BEEN CONS IDERED BY US IN THE CASE OF SHRI P.SELVARAJ ALSO. EVEN THOUG H THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS NOT CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT IN A FORMAL FORMAT, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS) HAS GIVEN ALL THE MATERIALS CONSIDERED BY HIM TO THE - - ITA 1237 & 1238 OF 2011 4 ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS PERUSAL AND VERIFICATION. IT IS ONLY AFTER THOSE MATERIALS WERE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS PROCEEDED T O ADJUDICATE THE MATTERS IN THE LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE S. THEREFORE, THERE CANNOT BE A CASE THAT THE REVENUE HAD NO OPPO RTUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE MATERIALS CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS). 6. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE SE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY, THE 7 TH OF AUGUST, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH AUGUST, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F.