Kannayalal C. Manwani, Nashik V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax.,

ITA 1390/PUN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7286 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-10-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE . , , BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / ITA NOS.1390 & 1391/PUN/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2010-11 SHRI KANNAYALAL C. MANWANI, 7A, HOLARAM COLONY, SADHY WASWANI ROAD, NASHIK 422002 PAN : AEGPM7310B . /APPELLANT VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANKET JOSHI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AJAY MODI DATE OF HEARING : 26.10.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:27.10.2017 / ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM : THERE ARE 2 APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE FOR THE A.YRS. 2009-10 AND 2010-11. THEY RELATE TO LEVY OF INTEREST U/S.234B OF THE ACT QUA THE SEIZED CASH. IN BOTH THE APPEALS, ASSESSEE RAISED AN IDENTICAL GROUNDS STATING THAT IT IS A CASE WHERE THERE WAS ACTION U/ S.132 OF THE ACT WHICH RESULTED IN THE DISCOVERY OF SEIZURE OF CASH. THE SAID CASH WAS NOT ADJUSTED TOWARDS THE ADVANCE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 2. IN THE GROUNDS, ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED WITH THE O RDER OF THE AO IN CHARGING THE SAID INTEREST WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT WHEN THE ASSESSEES SEIZED CASH IS WITH THE REVENUE. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAID ORDER OF THE AO. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US FOR B OTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. ITA NOS. 1390 & 1391/PUN/2015 SHRI KANNAYALAL C. MANWANI 2 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILE D A LETTER STATING THE FOLLOWING : THE ABOVE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2009-10 AND 2010- 11. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTS TO WITHDRAW THE ABOVE AP PEALS FILED BY HIM. THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE GRATEFUL IF THE ABOVE REQUEST IS ACCEPTED. 4. GIVING THE REASONS FOR THE ABOVE REQUEST, LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS A CASE WHERE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAKE A REQUEST TO THE AO AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 132B OF THE ACT AS KING FOR ADJUSTMENT OF THE SEIZED CASH TOWARDS ANY EXISTING LIABILITIES. HE ALSO MENTIONED FAIRLY THAT ALTHOUGH A LETTER DATED 14-10-2010 WAS WRITTEN WITH SIMILAR REQUEST FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11, THE SAME COULD NOT BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH ASSET WAS SEIZED. THIS CONDITION IS SPECI FIED IN THE FIRST PROVISO TO CLAUSE (I) OF SECTION 132B(I) OF THE ACT. THUS, TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO MEET THIS CONDITION FOR A.Y. 2010-11. ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ANY REQUEST AT ALL FOR A.Y. 2009-10. THIS IS A CASE WHERE THE CASH WAS SEIZED I N THE SEARCH CONDUCTED ON 06-01-2010. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND CONSIDERING THE ABOVE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE FAVOURABLY ALLOWED. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISE D BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 27 TH OCTOBER, 2017. ITA NOS. 1390 & 1391/PUN/2015 SHRI KANNAYALAL C. MANWANI 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT(A)-12, PUNE CIT 12, PUNE , , A BENCH PUNE; / GUARD FILE.