Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
141319914 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
18-03-2015
Appeal Filed By
Department
Bench Allotted
C
Next Hearing Date
04-03-2015
Assessment Year
2007-2008
Appeal Filed On
19-02-2013
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] LH U;K;IHB EQACBZ BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH JKTSUNZ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K ITA NO. 1413 /MUM/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2006 - 07 ITA NO. 1414/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2007 - 08 ACIT CC 47 R. NO. 658, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI. VS.` M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 301, THE ANGLE, 2 KRISHNA SANGHI PATH, GAMDEVI, MUMBAI 400007. APPELLANT / VIHYKFKHZ RESPONDENT / IZR;FKHZ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMPOSITE ORDER DATED 30.11.2012 OF CIT(A) ARISING FROM THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 1 5 3A R.W.S 143(3) FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED COMMON GROUNDS IN THESE REVENUE BY / JKTLP DH VKSJ LS SHRI H.P. HAOKIP ASSESSEE BY / FU/KKZFJRH FD VKSJ LS SHRI RAKESH JOSHI DATE OF HEARING 0 9 .03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 .03.2015 M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 2 | P A G E APPEALS EXCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION. THE GROUNDS RAISED FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 ARE AS UNDER: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN DELET ING ADDITION OF RS.45,50,876/ - ON THE GROUND THAT THE ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISCLOSED AS ADDITIONAL INCOME BY MR. PUJIT AGGARWAL IN APPLICATION BEFORE SETTLEMENT COMISSION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ORDER OF THE SETTLEMENT COMISS ION IN THE CASE WAS STILL AWAITED . 2. THERE WAS A SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132(1) IN THE GROUP CASES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 22.11.2006. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED IN THE SAID CASES. THERE WAS ANOTHER SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132(1) OF THE ACT ON 11.02.2010 AT THE RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS PREMISES OF M/S ORBIT CORPORATION LTD, THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED IN THE SAID PROCEEDINGS. AS REGARDS THE EARLIER SEARCH ON 22.11.2006, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME U/S 153C OF THE ACT ON 12.08.2008 DECL ARING TOTAL INCOME AT NIL FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08. THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153C R.W.S 143(3) WAS COMPLETED ON 30.12.2008 AT THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 88,17,476/ - AND RS. 1,01,99,500/ - FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY. WHILE FRAMING ASSESSM ENT U/S 153C R.W.S 143(3) , THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO DISALLOWED THE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 11 OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED. ON FURTHER APPEAL BEFO RE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE SET ASIDE IN ITA 6929 AND 6930 OF 2010 AND THE MATTER WAS RESTORED TO THE RECORD OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH DEPENDING ON THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 3 | P A G E BEFO RE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN CASE OF PUJIT AGARWAL, WHEREIN, THE SAME AMOUNT WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE OFFERED TO TAX. 3. IN PURSUANT TO THE SECOND SEARCH & SEIZURE CARRIED OUT ON 11.10.2010, THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLET ED FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 U/S 153A R.W.S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON 21.12.2011. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE C OMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 15 3A R.W.S 143(3) ADOPTED THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED U/S 1 5 3C R.W.S 143(3) FOR THESE TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE CIT(A) AND POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REPEATED THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153C IN PURSUANCE OF THE EARLIER SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION I N THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 153A R.W.S 143(3) IN PURSUANT TO THE SEARCH CARRIED OUT ON 11.02.2010. SINCE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153C IN PURSUANT TO THE EARLIER SEARCH HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THIS TRIBUNAL AND REMANDED THE SAME TO THE RECORD O F ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING AFRESH AS PER THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF PUJIT AGARWAL THEN THE SAME AMOUNT WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED IN THE HANDS OF HE ASSESSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A IS NO T SUSTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY, I N VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AR AS WELL AS LD. DR AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE RE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 4 | P A G E A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 HAS BEEN FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ADOPTING THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS ADDED IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153C R.W.S 143(3) ON 30.12.2008. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 45, 50,876/ - AND RS. 79,65,000/ - FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY WAS PART OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 88,17,476/ - AND RS. 1,01,99,500/ - ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT U/S. 153C R.W.S 143(3). THESE AMOUNTS HAVE ALREAD Y BEEN OFFERED TO TAX BY SHRI PUJIT AGARWAL IN AN APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER ARE PENDING. THIS TRIBUNAL WHILE DECIDING AN IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE APPEALS ARISING FROM THE ASSESS MENT ORDER PASSED U/S 153C R.W.S 143(3) FOR THESE TWO YEARS VIDE ORDER DATED 19.01.2011IN ITA NO. 6924 AND 6930 OF 2010 HAS SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE RECORD OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH IN PARA 7 AND 8 AS UNDER: - 7. WE HAVE CAREFU LLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SHRI PUJIT AGGARWAL WHO LOOKS AFTER THE DAY TO DAY WORKING OF THE GROUP IN THE CAPACITY OF MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S ORBIT CORP. LTD. HAS MADE A DISCLOSURE BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION FOR A SUM OF RS.L.29 CRORES WHICH INCLUDES THE CASH AMOUNT OF RS.49,46,665/ - AND RS.79,65,OOO/, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 RESPECTIVELY AS HIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND HAS PAID TAX ON THE SAME. PER CONTRA THE CASE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE CASH RECEIPTS OF RS.45,5O,876/ - AND RS. 82,65,000/ - FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AS ITS INCOME AND EXPENSES, THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE RECEIPTS BY CHEQUES AND CASH IS THE ASSESSEE'S INCOME AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO TAX. 8. IN M/S. TANAGER INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD. SUPRA, IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE PARA - 4 OF ITS ORDER AS UNDER: - M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 5 | P A G E 4. KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE FAIR AND PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH DEPENDING ON THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF SHRI PUJIT AGGARWAL WHEREIN THE SAME AMOUNT WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS OFFERED TO TAX. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS NO DOUBLE ADDITION OF THE SAME AMOUNT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF SHRI PUJIT AGGARWAL. AT THE SAME TIME, IF THE SAID AMOUNT OFFERED BY SHRI PUJIT AGGARWAL AS HIS INCOME IN THE APPLICATION FILED BEF ORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION IS NOT FINALLY ACCEPTED FOR ANY REASON, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ADD THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS AT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PER THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN ABOVE. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES.' IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DISTINGUISHING FEATURE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THAT T HERE IS NO FINDING AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO KEEPING IN VIEW THAT UNDER THE LAW DOUBLE ADDITION IS NOT PERMISSIBLE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MAT TER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES 0N THIS ACCOUNT AND SEND BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO SHALL DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S TANAGER INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD. SUPRA, AND ACCORDING TO LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE COMMON GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 ARE, THEREFORE, PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. SINCE THE AMOUNTS ASSESSED IN THE ASSESSMENT UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ADOPTED FROM THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153C AND THE ISSUE HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THIS TRIBUNAL TO THE RECORD OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A R.W.S 143(3) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE RECORD OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECONSIDER THE ENTIRE MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF M/S PROPERTY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. 6 | P A G E THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMM ISSION IN CASE OF SHRI PUJI T AGGARWAL. WE FURTHER DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN ANY CASE, NOT TO MAKE A DOUBLE ASSESSMENT OF THE SAME AMOUNT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER TWO PROCEEDINGS . 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . ORDER PRONOUCNED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF MARCH 2015 VKNS'K DH ?KKS'K.KK [KQYS U;K;KY; ES FNUKAD 18 EKPZ 2015 DKS DH XBZA SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJENDRA ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) ( ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / YS[KK LNL; ) (JUDICIAL MEMBER/ U;KF;D LNL; ) MUMBAI DATED .03.2015 SKS SR. P.S, COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. THE DR, C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI
