M. Mala Kondaiah, Hyd, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 1362/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6247 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Search and seizure; Reassessment proceedings; Set aside
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 143(3); 92; 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. ASST. YEAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1362/HYD/2015 2002-03 M. MALA KONDAIAH, HYDERABAD [PAN: ADUPM0073A] THE JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD 1363/HYD/2015 2004-05 FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI K.C. DEVDAS, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI K.J. RAO, DR DATE OF HEARING : 05-12-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18-01-2017 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : THESE TWO APPEALS ARE BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER( S) OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, HYDERAB AD FOR AYS. 2002-03 & 2004-05 DATED 22-09-2015 AND 10-09-2015 RESPECTIVELY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. R.K. TOWNSHIP PROMOTERS (P) LIMITED AND ALSO PARTNER IN M/S. AAR KAY REAL ESTATES. THERE WERE SEARCH AND SEI ZURE OPERATIONS IN THE BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES O F ASSESSEE ON 12-12-2005. PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 153A WE RE COMPLETED ON 31-12-2007, ACCEPTING THE INCOMES RETURNED. CONSE QUENT TO ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 2 -: THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE RETURNING OFFICER, WHILE CONTESTING THE ELECTION IN AY. 2002-03, LD.CIT (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD INVOKED THE PROVISIONS U/S. 263 AND HAS SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT. 31-12-2007, VIDE ORDER DT. 29-03-2010 AND DIRECT ED THE AO TO ENQUIRE INTO THE SOURCES OF INVESTMENT OF RS. 1,25,500/ - MADE BY ASSESSEE IN THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT KOTHWALGUDA, HYDERA BAD. ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE ORDER U/S. 263. IN TH E CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS, AFTER EXAMINING THE ISSUE A ND GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE, AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,25,500/- WHICH WAS NOT DISCLOSED BY ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF FILI NG ORIGINAL RETURN AND CONTENTIONS MADE BASED THE REVISED STATEMENTS H AVE NOT BEEN ACCEPTED. LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME. HE NCE, ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED ON THE SAID ADDITION OF RS. 1,2 5,500/- MADE U/S. 69 OF THE ACT AND RAISED THE GROUNDS ACCORDINGLY. 2.1. IN AY. 2004-05, SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN THE SENS E THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE CERTAIN INVESTMENTS WHICH WERE DISCLOSED IN TH E AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE RETURNING OFFICER, WHICH WERE NOT DIS CLOSED AT THE TIME OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT EARLIER. CONSEQUENTLY , AO INVOKED THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 AND IN THE RE-ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS, AO BROUGHT TO TAX AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5,57, 000/- STATED TO BE THE VALUE NOT DISCLOSED AT THE TIME OF COMPLETI ON OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S. 69 OF THE ACT. LD.CIT(A) CON FIRMED THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE GROUNDS IN THIS YEAR AS WELL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. COUNSEL AND LD.DR AND PERUS ED THE DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD. ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 3 -: 4. AS FAR AS APPEAL IN 1362/HYD/2015 IS CONCERNED, THE ONLY ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER ASSESSEES EXPLANA TION WITH REFERENCE TO THE INVESTMENT IN KOTHWALGUDA PROPERTY AT RS. 1,25,500/- CAN BE ACCEPTED? THE FACTS AS STATED B Y THE AO AND THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A), FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS AS UNDER: 4. THE A.O. CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AS PER PARA 1, PAGE 3 OF SALE DEED DATED 16-02- 2002, THE CONSIDERATION WAS ALREADY PAID AS UNDER: 'THAT IN PURSUANCE OF AFORESAID OFFER AND ACCEPTA NCE, THE VENDEE HAS ALREADY PAID THE ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RUPE ES 1,25,500/- (RUPEES ONE LAKH TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED ONLY) T O THE VENDOR BY WAY OF CASH, THUS THE VENDOR HEREBY ADMIT AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF THE ENTIRE SALE AMOUNT HAVING RECEIVED FROM THE VENDEE. THUS THE V ENDOR HEREBY CONVEY, SELL, TRANSFER AND ASSIGNS UP TO THE SCHEDULE OF THE PRO PERTY ABSOLUTELY AND FOREVER. THEREFORE, THE A.O. CLEARLY HELD THAT THE PAYMENT W AS MADE IN CASH OF RS.1,25,500 ON OR BEFORE 16-02-2002 AND THE CONTENT ION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT WAS STILL PAYABLE AS ON 31-03-2002 WAS INCORRECT. AS THE SOURCES FOR RS.1,25,500 WERE NOT EXPLAINED BY THE A SSESSEE, THE SAME WAS BROUGHT TO TAX U/S 69 OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE AP PELLANT WHILE EXPLAINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, SUBMITTED THAT TH E SITE ADMEASURING 697 SQ.MTS AT KOTHWALGUDA, HYDERABAD, WAS PURCHASED FOR CONSIDERATION OF RS.1,25,500 THROUGH SALE DEED DATED 16-02-2002. DUR ING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED COMPLETELY DIF FERENT EXPLANATION STATING THAT THE APPELLANT WAS TO RECEIVE AN AMOUNT OF RS.58,49,695 FROM M/S R.K.TOWNSHIP PROMOTERS (P) LIMITED AND THE AMOU NT OF RS.1,29,500 (RS.1,25,500 - SALE CONSIDERATION PLUS RS. 4,000 - REGISTRATION CHARGES) WAS TO BE ADJUSTED AGAINST THE AMOUNT RECEIVABLE FR OM THE COMPANY RKTPPL. AS PER THE COPY OF SALE DEED, THE PROPERTY AT KOTHWALGUDA WAS PURCHASED FROM SMT. MADCLULURI BALA KONDAMMA W/O SH RI MADDULURI MALA KONDAIAH (APPELLANT), THE DIRECTOR OF RKTPPL. THE DOCUMENT CLEARLY STATES THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,25,500 WAS PAID IN CA SH TO THE VENDOR BEFORE THE DATE OF REGISTRATION ON 16-02-2002. ADMI TTEDLY, THERE WERE NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN CONSTR UCTING AND RECONSTRUCTING HIS BALANCE-SHEETS DEPENDING ON THE NECESSITY. IN THE ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 4 -: ORIGINAL SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS, THE INVESTMENT WAS N OT REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE-SHEET AT ALL. IN PROCEEDINGS U/S 143 (3) RW S 263, IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT SINCE THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.1,25,500 WA S YET TO BE PAID AS ON 31-03-2002, BOTH THE ASSET AND LIABILITY WERE NOT R EFLECTED IN BALANCE- SHEET SUBMITTED DURING ORIGINAL ASST. PROCEEDINGS. HOWEVER, DURING 143 (3) RWS 263 PROCEEDINGS, THE BALANCE-SHEET WAS RECO NSTRUCTED REFLECTING THE ASSET AND LIABILITY. NOW DURING THE PRESENT APP EAL PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT CAME UP WITH ANOTHER VERSION THAT THE PAY MENT OF RS.1,25,500 WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE AMOUNTS RECEIVABLE FROM TH E COMPANY. ALL THE THREE VERSIONS ARE INCONSISTENT AND ARE NOT SUPPORT ED BY ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY A.O. RELY ING ON THE SALE DEED WHEREIN IT WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 1,25,500 WAS PAID IN CASH IS CONFIRMED. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSING THE DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD, WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH TH E ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). AS ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN INCONSISTENT STAND AND HAS NOT PROPERLY EXPLAINED THE INVESTMENT MADE, WE ARE OF TH E OPINION THAT AO HAS CORRECTLY BROUGHT TO TAX THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1, 25,500/- AS INVESTMENT IN THE SAID PROPERTY WHICH WAS NOT ORIGIN ALLY DISCLOSED. IN VIEW OF THAT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT I N THE GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, THEY ARE DISMISS ED. 6. WITH REFERENCE TO THE ISSUES IN ITA NO. 1363/HYD/20 15, THE FACTS AS STATED BY THE LD.CIT(A) ARE AS UNDER: 3. THE FACTS AND DETAILS OF THE ISSUE ARE AS UNDE R: A. G. THE FOLLOWING WERE THE PROPERTIES DECLARED BEFOR E THE RETURNING OFFICER BY SRI M. MALA KONDAIAH. ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 5 -: SL. NO. PARTY ADDRESS EXTENT DT. OF REG. PURCHASE VALUE 1 M.M. KONDAIAH (M.B KONDAMMA JOINT) SY. NO. 126, 127, DOYEN CHAMBERS, YELLREDDYGUDA, HYDERABAD 1800 SFT 02.12.03 19,44,000 2 M.B. KONDAMMA (M.M KONDAIAH JOINT) SY. NO. 126, 127, DOYEN CHAMBERS, YELLAREDDYGUDA, HYDERABAD 1200 SFT 02.12.03 12,96,000 H. THE ABOVE PROPERTY WAS REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF APPELLANT AND HIS WIFE SMT. M.B. KONDAMMA VIDE DOCUMENT DATED 02.12.2 003. THE REGISTERED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY WAS RS.32,40,000 A ND THE REGISTRATION CHARGES WERE RS. 2,41,900. THUS THE TOTAL INVESTMEN T WAS RS.34,81,900. THE AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED BY SMT. KONDAMMA AND SRI M. MALE' KONDAIAH WERE AS UNDER: I. AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED BY SMT. BALA KONDAMMA RS.14,2 4,000 II. AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED BY SRI M. MALA KONDAIAH RS.2 0,57,900 I. THE INVESTMENT MADE BY SMT. KONDAMMA OF RS. 14,2 4,000 WAS VERIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS AND THE SOURCE S FOR INVESTMENT WERE SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND NO ADDITION WAS MADE O N THIS ACCOUNT. J. HOWEVER WITH REFERENCE TO INVESTMENT MADE BY SRI M. MALAKONDAIAH OF RS. 20,57,900, DURING ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3 ) R.W.S.153A THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN INVESTMENT ONLY TO THE TUNE OF R S.15.00 LAKHS AND NOT RS.20,57,900. THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A WAS MADE ON 31.12.2007 I.E. SUBSEQUENT TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OP ERATION ON 12.12.2005. EVEN THEN THE INVESTMENT SHOWN IN CAPIT AL A/C AND IN BALANCE SHEET WAS ONLY RS.15.00 LAKHS. BASED ON THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO RETURNING OFFICER, ONGOLE THE ASSESSME NT WAS REOPENED U/S. 147. K. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE P ARA-2, PAGE-4 OF SALE DEED DATED 02.11.2003, THE ASSESSEE PAID RS.32,40,0 00 AS UNDER: DATE CHEQUE NO. AMOUNT (RS) 02.12.2003 083705 18,15,000 02.12.2003 448791 14,25,000 TOTAL: 32,40,000 ON RECEIPT OF SUCH MONEY THE VENDOR DELIVERED THE V ACANT POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE APPELLANT. AS PER THE SALE DEED THE AMOUNT INVESTED WAS RS.20,57,000 WHEREAS AS PER THE BALANCE SHEET T HE AMOUNT INVESTED WAS ONLY RS.15.00 LAKHS. AFTER ISSUING THE SHOW CAU SE NOTICE AFTER, CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.5,57,000 (RS.20,57,000 RS.15,00,00 0) AS THE UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69 OF I.T. ACT, 1961. ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 6 -: 4. DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE APP ELLANT PLEADED THAT HE OBTAINED LOAN OF RS.15.00 LAKHS FROM STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD AND REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.5,57,000 WAS MET FROM HIS OW N SOURCES, HE ALSO SUBMITTED RECONSTRUCTED BALANCE SHEET AS UNDER: LIABILITIES RECONSTRUCTED CONSTRUCTED ASSETS RECONSTRUCTED CONSTRUCTED CAPITAL A/C 5437234 437234 AGRI. LAND AT PORANKI 112000 112000 OTHER ADVANCES 5848400 4650000 AGRI. LAND AT PB PURAM 96700 96700 OBC 568021 568021 HOUSE AT VIJAYAWADA 675000 202500 GUNTUR (OBC GUNTUR) FLAT AT VISAKAPATNAM 1100 SFT 509066 509066 HOUSE AT JUBILIEE HILLS, HYDERABAD 1085000 1085000 SITE AT NUZIVEDU 289.3 SQ. YDS 49500 49500 SITE AT LANKELAPALEM 0.24/1/4 27000 -- DOYAN CHAMBERS 2057900 1500000 SITE AT KANDUKURU 11500 -- AAR KAY REAL ESTATES 667279 667279 R.K. TOWNSHIP PROMOTERS 1625000 1625000 GOKUL KRISHNA COLLEGE OF ENGG 4173000 4173000 R.K. TOWNSHIP DEVELOPERS 50000 50000 R.K. TOWNSHIP CONSTRUCTION 50000 50000 R.K. TOWNSHIP CONSTRUCTION 50000 50000 R.K. TOWNSHIP & ESTATES 50000 50000 KOTHWALGUDA SITE 129500 -- CASH & BANK BALANCES 435210 435210 11853655 10655255 11853655 10655255 IT WAS FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER M ADE AN ADDITION OF RS.5,57,000 AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WITHOUT DOUBT ING THE ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 7 -: CORRESPONDING LIABILITIES AS PER THE RECONSTRUCTED BALANCE SHEET. THEREFORE THERE IS NO REASON TO MAKE ADDITION OF RS . 5,57,900 AFTER ACCEPTING GENUINENESS OF THE SOURCES OF INVESTMENT. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION ON RECO RD. EVEN PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCLOS E THE INFORMATION CORRECTLY. THE FLAT AT YELLAREDDYGUDA, HYDERABAD WA S PURCHASED ON 02.12.2003. AS PER THIS DOCUMENT THE APPELLANT CLEA RLY MADE INVESTMENT OF RS.20,57,900 STILL THE INVESTMENT IN FLAT WAS WR ONGLY SHOWN AT RS.15.00 LAKHS AS AGAINST THE CORRECT INVESTMENT OF RS.20,57,900. IN THE RECONSTRUCTED BALANCE SHEET TO EXPLAIN SOURCES FOR UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT OF RS.5,57,000 THE APPELLANT SIMPLY INCR EASED 'OTHER ADVANCES' ON LIABILITIES SIDE FROM RS.46,50,000 TO RS. 58,48,400. ADMITTEDLY THE APPELLANT DID NOT MAINTAIN ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTING AND RECONSTRUCTING BALANCE SHEET BASED ON THE BANK ACCOUNTS TO SUIT HIS REQUIREMENTS. THE INCREASE IN 'OTHER ADVANCES' IN RECONSTRUCTED BALANCE SHEET IS NOTHING BUT BALANCING FIGURE TO TAKE CARE OF INCREASE IN INVESTMENT OF RS.5,57,0 00. 7. LD. COUNSEL REFERRING TO THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER INVESTMENTS ALSO WHICH WERE DISCLOSED BY ASSESSEE IN THE REVISED STATEMENT WHICH WE RE ACCEPTED BY THE AO AND NO ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE, WHEREAS THE ADDITION WAS ONLY RESTRICTED TO THE AMOUNTS OF DISCREPANCY IN TH E DOYEN CHAMBERS. IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT AO/CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THE REVISED BALANCE SHEET FILED EXPLAINING T HE AMOUNTS. 8. LD. DR, HOWEVER, SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEES EXPLANATI ON IS A MAKE BELIEVE ONE AND CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS HE HAS NO T DISCLOSED THE INVESTMENTS IN THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF COMPLETION O F ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 WE RE INVOKED AND THE AMOUNT WAS BROUGHT TO TAX. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AND EXAMINED THE FACTS AS PLACED ON RECORD. AS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE, THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 8 -: OF RS. 11,98,400/- FROM THE ORIGINAL BALANCE SHEET AN D RECONSTRUCTED THE BALANCE SHEET WHICH WAS AS UNDER: S.NO. NAME OF ACCOU NT AMOUNT 1. HOUSE AT VIJAYAWADA (6,75,000-2,02,500) 4,72,500 2. SITE AT LANKAPALEM 27,000 3. DONEY C HAMBERS PROPERTY DIFFERENCE 5,57,900 4. KOTHWALGUDA SITE 1,29,500 5. SITE AT KANAKURI VILLAGE 11,500 FLEW OUT OF SOURCES FOR RS. 11,98,400 SHOWN ABOVE 11,98,400 9.1. OUT OF THE ABOVE AMOUNTS, AO HAS CONSIDERED ONLY THE AMOUNT OF RS. 5,57,000/- FOR MAKING ADDITION AND HAS NOT EXAMINED THE OTHER AMOUNTS, THE REASONS OF WHICH ARE N OT AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE ARE NOT SURE WHETHER THOSE IN VESTMENTS WERE MADE IN THIS YEAR OR IN EARLIER YEARS. BE THAT A S IT MAY, THERE WAS A SHORT DISCLOSURE TO AN EXTENT OF RS. 11,98,400/- , OUT OF WHICH RS. 5,57,000/- WAS CONSIDERED AS UNDISCLOSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY ASSESSE E IS NOT PROPER IN THE SENSE THAT NO REASONS WERE GIVEN, WHY THE ABOVE AMOUNTS WERE NOT DISCLOSED EARLIER. EVEN THOUGH A REC ONSTRUCTED BALANCE SHEET WAS PREPARED, THE CORRESPONDING SOURCES WERE NOT PROPERLY EXPLAINED. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINIO N THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ABOVE AMOUNT DOES NOT REQ UIRE ANY INTERFERENCE. IN VIEW OF THAT, WE AFFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). GROUNDS ON THIS ISSUE ARE REJECTED. 10. THE OTHER ISSUE WHICH WAS RAISED BEFORE US IS WI TH REFERENCE TO COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 144. LD.CIT(A) GAVE A FINDING ON THIS ISSUE AS UNDER: ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 9 -: 5.II. THE GROUND NO. 2 AND 3 REFERS TO COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ASSESSMENT U/S . 144 AS NO RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S . 148. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FULLY CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD DURING ORIGINAL SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ISSUED THE SHOW CA USE NOTICE DURING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, CONSIDERED THE REPLY OF T HE ASSESSEE WHICH FORMS PART OF ASSESSMENT ORDER, THEREAFTER MADE ASS ESSMENT U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147. I DO NOT SEE ANY INFIRMITY IN MENTIONI NG THE SECTION AS 144 AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME IN R ESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148. EVEN OTHERWISE THE ASSESSMENT MADE AFTER FOLL OWING DUE PROCEDURE OF LAW CANNOT BE HELD IN VALID BY MERE MENTIONING O F SEC. 144 INSTEAD OF 143. THEREFORE THESE TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DIS MISSED. 11. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUND RAISED BY ASSESSEE. EVEN THOUGH A NOTICE U/S. 147 WAS ISSUED, ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY REVISED R ETURN. EVEN THOUGH THE PROCEEDINGS WERE COMPLETED BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICES TO ASSESSEE AND EXAMINING THE ISSUES, TECHNICALLY, THE A SSESSMENT HAS TO BE COMPLETED ONLY U/S. 144, AS PROVIDED IN SU B-SECTION 1(A). WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUND. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND IS REJECTED. 12. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH JANUARY, 2017 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER HYDERABAD, DATED 18 TH JANUARY, 2017 TNMM ITA NOS. 1362 & 1363/HYD/2015 M. MALA KONDAIAH :- 10 -: COPY TO : 1. M. MALA KONDAIAH, C/O. B. NARSING RAO & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, PLOT NO. 554, ROAD NO. 92, J UBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD. 2. THE JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-3, HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT-3, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.