DCIT, Central Circle-4, Hyderabad V. Smt. Saroj Agarwal, Hyderabad

ITA 1693/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 169322514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 31-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D D GOYAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A C GANGAIAH
• Keywords: Search and seizure

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER A ND SHRI AKBER BASHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R ITA NOS.52 TO 55/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04 TO 2006-07 SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. (PAN ABFPA 5475 R) VS DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIR-4, CIR-4, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) ITA NOS.1693 TO1696/HYD/2010 ASST.YEARS: 2002-03 TO 2006-07 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIR-4, -VS- CIR-4, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. (PAN ABFPA 5475 R) ( RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.C. GANGAIAH DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.D. GOYAL DATE OF HEARING: 22-9-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22-9-20 11. O R D E R PER BENCH: THESE EIGHT APPEALS, FOUR BY THE ASSESSEE AND OTH ER FOUR BY THE DEPARTMENT ARISE OUT OF SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT (A)-VII, HYDERABAD AND THEY ARE PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 2-03 TO 2006-07. ITA NOS 52 TO 55 AND OTHERS. SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. 2 SINCE COMMON AND IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN A LL THESE CROSS APPEALS, THESE ARE TAKEN UP TOGETHER AND DISPOSED O F BY THIS COMBINED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE COMMON GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) MADE ON 25-10-2010 IN ITA NO.359/TR/DCIT-CC-4/CIT(A)-VII/10-11 IS NOT CORRECT EITHER IN LAW OR IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E. 2. THE CIT (A) IS NOT CORRECT IN ESTIMATING THE PR OFIT AT 5.5% ON THE UN-ACCOUNTED TURNOVER. 3. THE CIT (A) HAS NO BASIS FOR ESTIMATING THE PROF IT AT 5.5% AND REJECTING THE REASONABLE PROFIT ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT SHALL BE URGED AT THE TIME OF APPEAL HEARING. 3. THE COMMON GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ A S UNDER:- I. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS ON FACTS . II. THE CIT (A) HAS NOT DISCUSSED THE MERIT S ON RECORD AND THE MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERAT ION. III. THE CIT (A) ORDER IS ERRONEOUS ON FACT S FOR DELETING PEAK PURCHASES AMOUNTING TO RS.1,20,79,832. THE ASSESSE E HIMSELF AGREED THAT NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHERE MAIN TAINED FOR THAT PERIOD, ACCORDINGLY THE AO WORKED OUT PEAK ITA NOS 52 TO 55 AND OTHERS. SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. 3 PURCHASES BASED ON SEIZED MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEA RCH OPERATION. IV. THE CIT (A)S ORDER REDUCED THE PROFIT P ERCENTAGE ON ADDITIONAL TURNOVER FOUND DURING SEARCH OPERATION F ROM 10% TO 5.5 IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREAD Y CLAIMED EXPENDITURE FOR THAT YEAR AND THE INCOME ON ADDITIO NAL TURNOVER IS EXCESS, HENCE THE ASSESSEE CANNOT CLAIM ANY EXPENDITURE. ACCORDINGLY AO WORKED OUT THE PROFIT PERCENTAGE AT HIGHER RATE OF 10% ON ADDITIONAL TURN OVER FOUND DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION. V. THE DIVISION OF PROFIT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND RK AGARWAL CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS THERE IS NO AGREEM ENT EXISTING BETWEEN THE TWO AND NO AGREEMENT FOR SHARI NG THE PROFIT RATIO. VI. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE RAISED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT (A) HAD GIVEN SOME RELIEFS TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PASSING A SPEAKING/REASONED ORDER. HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO T HE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION FOR WHICH THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION EXCEPT STATING THAT, WH ILE ADJUDICATING THE APPEALS, THE CIT (A) DID NOT DECIDE THE ISSUE RELAT ING TO GROUND NO.4 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. HENCE, IT IS S UBMITTED THAT THIS GROUND ALSO MAY BE DECIDED AFRESH BY THE CIT (A). UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FEEL IT PROPER AND JUST TO RESTORE THE ENTIRE ISSUES, INCLUDING THAT OF GROUND NO.4 RAISED BY THE ITA NOS 52 TO 55 AND OTHERS. SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. 4 ASSESSEE, TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR FRESH CONS IDERATION WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURP OSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22-9-2011. SD/- SD/- SMT.ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN AKBER BASHA JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. DT/- 22-9-2011. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, HYDERABAD. 2.SAROJ AGARWAL. 4-1-569, RELIANCAE COMPLEX, TROOP BAZAR, HYDERABAD. 3.CIT (A)-VII, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT, AP, HYDERABAD. 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. ITA NOS 52 TO 55 AND OTHERS. SAROJ AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. 5