Shri Kanchanlal Natwarlal Rana, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Surat

ITA 1506/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0965 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANTONY PARIATH
• Assessee Lawyers: HEMANT JADIA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI HEMANT JADIA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI ANTONY PARIATH, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 07/07/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/08/2016 / O R D E R THESE TWO APPEALS BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, SURAT DATED 21.01.2013 I N THE CASE OF SMT. ALKABEN AMRUTRAM GURU FOR AY 2004-05 AND AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, SURAT DATED 05.03.2013 IN THE CASE OF SHRI KANCHANLAL NAT WARLAL RANA FOR AY 1999- 2000. SINCE THESE APPEALS RAISE COMMON GROUND, BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CO NSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE RESPECTIVE GROUNDS RAISED ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO.885/AHD/2013 ASSESSEE:-ALKABEN A. GURUAY 2 004-2005 THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.16,80,000/- MADE AS UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL. SN ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 885/AHD/2013 2004-05 ALKABEN AMRUTRAM GURU, 6/519, NAVA RAM DWARA, GELEMANDI MAIN ROAD, SURAT-395004 PAN : AJEPM 1566 C INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6 (1), SURAT 2 1506/AHD/2013 1999-00 KANCHANLAL NATWARLAL RANA, 6/42, 90/91, 3 RD FLOOR, SUTHAR FALIA, GOLEMANDI, SURAT 395 004 PAN : AGLPR 1189 E INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6 (21), SURAT SMC-IT NOS. 885 & 1506/AHD/2013 ALKABEN A. GURU & KANCHANLAL RANA 2004-05 & 1999-2000 RESPTVLY 2 ITA NO.1506/AHD/2013 ASSESSEE:-KANCHANLAL N. RANA AY 1999-2000 THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.17,04,370/-. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE(S) CONTENDS THAT BO TH THESE PARTIES WERE ALLEGED TO BE PAPER-COMPANY OF M/S. M.D. PATEL GROU P. THIS INFORMATION WAS REVEALED BY SURVEY ACTION ON ONE SHRI PANKAJ DA NAWALA AND M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP. A STATEMENT AT BAR IS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI HEMANT JADIA, ADVOCATE TO THE EFFECT THAT M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP HAS OWNED UP THE TRANSACTIONS, INVESTMENTS AND INCOME F ROM ALL THE FRONT COMPANIES, INCLUDING THESE TWO ASSESSEES. TO SUPPO RT HIS STATEMENT, IT IS CONTENDED THAT FOR VERIFICATION THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER MAY BE DIRECTED TO VERIFY THIS STATEMENT AND FACTS FROM THE SETTLEMENT PETITION OF M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP WHICH HAS GONE UP TO THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT. 4. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IS HEARD. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. A STATEMENT AT BAR IS MADE BY SHRI HEMANT JADIA, ADVOCATE OF GUJARA T HIGH COURT AND SOME OF THE ORDERS OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ARE ON THE RECORD IN RESPECT OF PURPORTED LITIGATION BETWEEN M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP AND UNION OF INDIA. THE FACTS ABOUT SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OWNING UP OF THE INCOME BY THE KINGPIN M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP ETC. ARE NOT ON THE R ECORD. IN VIEW THEREOF THESE APPEALS ARE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK TO TH E FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CALL THE ASSESSEES TO DEMONSTRATE THAT T HE SUBJECT MATTER RAISED IN THESE APPEALS IS COVERED BY THE ALLEGED SETTLEMENT PETITION OF M/S. M.D. PATEL GROUP AND THE RESULT THEREOF. IT IS MADE CLE AR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL VERIFY NECESSARY RECORDS AND THE ASSES SEES WILL FULLY CO-OPERATE SMC-IT NOS. 885 & 1506/AHD/2013 ALKABEN A. GURU & KANCHANLAL RANA 2004-05 & 1999-2000 RESPTVLY 3 IN THIS MATTER. IN CASE OF NON-COOPERATION BY THE ASSESSEES, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO TAKE APPROPRIATE VIEW IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 ST AUGUST, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD; DATED 01/08/2016 *BIJU T. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD