Income Tax Officer., Lakhimpur-Kheri V. Mr. Neelmani Verma., Lakhimpur-Kheri

ITA 151/LKW/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6555 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-04-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJENDRA KUMAR YADAV
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Tax effect
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.151/LKW/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006 - 07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, LAKHIMPUR KHERI. VS. MR. NEELMANI VERMA, S/O SHRI PARASHURAM VERMA, MOHAMMADI ROAD, GOLA, LAKHIMPUR KHERI. PAN:AEDPV6439F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI P. K. DEY, D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR YADAV, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 29/04/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 6 /05/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT (A), BAREILLY DATED 21/12/2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 2007. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.6,52,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL. THE LD CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT APPRECIA TED THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS NARRATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS WRONGLY ALLOWED A RELIEF OF RS.1,81,500/ - OUT OF 2 ADDITIO N MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN BUILDING ETC OF RS.2,81,500/ - . 3. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS MAY BE CANCELLED AND THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE RESTORED. 4 . ANY OTHER GROUND OF APPEAL MAY BE TAKEN AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT TAX EFFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS BELOW RS.3,00,000/ - AND, THEREF ORE, AS PER BOARDS INSTRUCTION , T HIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS RS.2,61,438/ - . 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS WORKING OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING TAX EFFECT. HENCE, AS PER THE BOARDS INST RUCTION , THIS APPEAL O F THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BECAUSE OF LOW TAX EFFECT. THE SAME IS DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 6 /05/2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR