Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
153821714 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
8 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
22-05-2012
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
22-05-2012
Assessment Year
2003-2004
Appeal Filed On
09-09-2011
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1537, 1538, 1539 & 1540(MDS)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005 -06 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE I(3), CHENNAI. VS. M/S. VALLIAMMAI SOCIETY, 3, VEERASAMY STREET, WEST MAMBALAM,CHENNAI-600033 PAN AAATV2451J. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : DR. SIBENDU MOHARANA, IRS, CI T RESPONDENT BY: S/SHRI N.DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE & B.S.PURSHOTHAM, CHAR TERED ACCOUNTANT DATE OF HEARING : 22 ND MAY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 ND MAY, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT ALL THESE FOUR APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE, IN RESPECT OF THE SAME ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR S ARE 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06. THE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE COM MISSIONER - - ITA 1537 TO 1540 OF 2011 2 OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-II AT CHENNAI, DATED 28-6-20 11 AND ARISE OUT OF THE ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143( 3), READ WITH SECTIONS 153C AND 153A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE M/S.VALLIAMMAI SOCIETY IS A SOCIET Y REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT , 1961. IN THE LIGHT OF SEARCH OPERATIONS CARRIED OUT UNDER SE CTION 132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 IN THE OFFICE AND RESIDENT IAL PREMISES OF SHRI T.R.PACHAMUTHU, CHAIRMAN OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIE TY, ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE UNDER SECTION 153C OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 3. WHEN THESE ASSESSMENTS WERE TAKEN IN FIRST APPE AL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), HE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSMENTS WERE QUASHED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPE LLATE TRIBUNAL, C-BENCH, CHENNAI IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE F OR THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000, 2000-01 AND 200 1-02 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY DID NOT HAV E VALID JURISDICTION TO FRAME THE ASSESSMENTS UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 11- 1-2011 IN ITA - - ITA 1537 TO 1540 OF 2011 3 NOS.1557, 1558 & 1559(MDS)/2010, AS MENTIONED ABOVE , THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) ACCEPTED THE CO NTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND QUASHED THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT S. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AND, THEREFORE, THESE APPEALS BEFORE US. 4. THE COMMON GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ALL THESE APPEALS READ AS BELOW:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO NOTE THAT THE RELIED UPON ORDERS OF THE ITAT, C-BENCH, DATED 11-1-2011 IN ITA NOS.1557 TO 1559(MDS)/09 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2001-02 HAVE BEEN DISPUTED AND THAT THE ISSUE HAS NOT BECOME FINAL. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO NOTE THAT THERE IS NO SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT IN SECTION 153C OF THE IT ACT, 1961 THAT REASONS/SATISFACTION NOTE HAS TO BE RECORDED BY THE A.O BEFORE INITIATING PROCEEDINGS. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS COMMON FOR THE ENTIRE SRM - - ITA 1537 TO 1540 OF 2011 4 GROUP CASE AND THAT AFTER PERUSING THE RELEVANT MATERIALS LIKE SEIZED DOCUMENTS, APPRAISAL REPORT AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, THE A. O WAS SATISFIED THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR INITIATIN G PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C AND ACCORDINGLY INITIATED PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C. 5. WE HEARD DR. SIBENDU MOHARANA, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX APPEARING FOR THE REVENU E AND SHRI N.DEVANATHAN, THE LEARNED COUNSEL ALONGWITH SH RI B.S.PURSHOTHAM, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, FOR THE RESPO NDENT- ASSESSEE. 6. AS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL, C-BENCH, CHENNAI, HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUES INVOLVE D IN THESE APPEALS, IN THE OTHER SET OF APPEALS FILED IN THE C ASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000, 2000-0 1 AND 2001-02. AFTER ANALYZING THE DETAILS OF THE ASSESS MENTS AND THE CONNECTED RECORDS, THE TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE ASSE SSING - - ITA 1537 TO 1540 OF 2011 5 AUTHORITY HAS NOT RECORDED ANY SATISFACTION TO INIT IATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C, AS CONTEMPLATED IN LAW. THE TR IBUNAL, THEREFORE, HELD THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SU PREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI VS ACIT AND ANOTHER, 289 ITR 341, IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THAT CASE. IN THE S AID DECISION THE HONBLE APEX COURT HAS HELD THAT IT IS MANDATORY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECORD SATISFACTION THAT MATERIAL/INFORMATION RELATING TO THE OTHER PERSON PRIMA FACIE MAKES OUT A CASE OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. ACCORDINGL Y THE ASSESSMENTS WERE HELD TO BE VOID AB INITIO. 7. OBVIOUSLY, THESE IMPUGNED APPEALS ALSO ARISE OU T OF THE SAME SET OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. WE HAV E TO FOLLOW THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED ON 11-1-20 11. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY FOL LOWED THE ABOVE STATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS BINDIN G ON HIM. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE RE VENUE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. - - ITA 1537 TO 1540 OF 2011 6 ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME O F HEARING ON , THE OF JUNE, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 22 ND MAY, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.
