Shri Nagendra Narayan Sharma, Bharuch V. The Income tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharuch

ITA 149/AHD/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0191 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 9 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2005
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C K MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE OF HEARING: 30.10.2009 DRAFTED ON 3.11.09 ITA NO.149/AHD/2005 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-2001 NAGENDRA NARAYAN SHARMA C/O. BHUPENDRA C. MEHTA 15, AJANTA NAGAR, OPP. 288 SIDHNATH NAGAR, BHARUCH-392 001 VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(3), BHARUCH. PAN/GIR NO. : AGYPS9015N (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K.PATEL RESPONDENT BY: SHRI C.K.MISHRA SR. D.R. O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(APPEALS)-IV, BARODA, DATED 2.11.2004. 2. GROUND NOS.1 AND 2 OF THE APPEAL READS AS UNDER: 1. THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT ASSESSING OFFICER ( RESPONDENT AO) IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION, WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF L AW AND HENCE VOID ABINITIO. 2. THE RESPONDENT AO HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING T HAT THE PAYMENT OF RS.7 LAKHS IS A COMPENSATION FOR EMPLOYE RS OBLIGATION UNDER LAW. THE EMPLOYER HAD PAID SEPARATELY FOR HIS LEGAL OBLIGATION. THERE WAS NO MORE AND OTHER THAN THOSE ANY LEGAL OBLIGATION FOR WHICH THE EMPLOYER WAS UNDER OBLIGAT ION WHATSOEVER TO PAY THE AMOUNT. THE AMOUNT OF RS.7 LACS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT AS A COMPENSATION IN CONNECTION WI TH THE LOSS OF ITA NO.149/AHD/2 005 M/S.NAGENDRA NARAYAN SHARMA ASST.YEAR -2000-01 - 2 - EMPLOYMENT DUE TO CLOSURE OF CONCERN OF THE EMPLOYE R AND THEREFORE, IS NOT TAXABLE U/S. 17(3)(I) OF THE ACT. THE TERM COMPENSATION IS DEFINED AT MANY PLACES AS UNDER. 3. SINCE THE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THE A BOVE THREE APPEALS ARE COMMON, THEY ARE BEING DISPOSED OF TOGETHER BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 4. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASS ESSEE FILED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE D BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA N O.3918, 3920 AND 3921/AHD/2004 A. Y: 2000-01,2000-01 AND 2000-01 IN THE CASE OF LATABEN R. BARAIYA, EFTEKHAR AHMED ANSARI AND JULFI KAR KHAN VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (3), BHARUCH ORDER DATED 2 0.10.2009 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT AP PEAL IS SAME AS WAS IN THE ABOVE CITED DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREF ORE, FOLLOWING THE ABOVE CITED ORDER, THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE INVOLVE IN THIS APPEAL. 5. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO AGR EED WITH THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENT ATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. 7. IN THIS APPEAL, ONE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT HE WAS NOT ALLOWED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY IN RESPECT O F THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE JCIT UNDER SECTION 144A OF THE ACT. FURTHER, IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUN AL IN THE CASE OF DEEPAK VERMA VS DCIT (2008) 22 SOT 345 (DELHI) WHICH COULD NOT BE ITA NO.149/AHD/2 005 M/S.NAGENDRA NARAYAN SHARMA ASST.YEAR -2000-01 - 3 - CONSIDERED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. AT TIME OF THE HEARING LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ADMITTED THAT IT SHALL BE FAIR AND IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATION AFTER TAKING INT O CONSIDERATION THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL AND AFTER ALLOWI NG SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE ABOVE MENTIONED DIRECTIONS. THUS T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARI NG ON 30.10.2009. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (N. S. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER DATE:30-10-2009 PREPARED AND COMPARED BY: PARAS ITA NO.149/AHD/2 005 M/S.NAGENDRA NARAYAN SHARMA ASST.YEAR -2000-01 - 4 - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. RE SPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. THE C IT CONCERNED 5. THE D.R. ITAT, AHMEDABAD, 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// DR / AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD