Brijlal Agarwalla(HUF), Angul V. CIT, Bhubaneswar

ITA 171/CTK/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 17122114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K AJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: P K MISHRA
• Section: 263; 143(3)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 171 / CTK ./20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 9 - 20 1 0 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI S .V. MEHROTRA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) , AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO. 1 71 / CTK / 20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 9 - 20 1 0 SHRI BRIJLAL AGARWALLA (HUF), ..... .......... ...... .. .APP ELL ANT PROP. M/S. TALCHER AUTOMOBILES, P.O. TALCHER TOWN, DIST. ANGUL, ODISHA - 759 107 [PAN : AACHB 8845 G] - VS. - COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ............................ RESPONDENT BHUBANESWAR, RAJASWAR VIHAR, 3 RD FLOOR, BHUBANESWAR, ODI SHA APPEARANCES BY: SHRI P.K. MISHRA, A.R., FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI K. AJAY KUMAR, CIT, D.R, FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : OCTOBER 20 , 2 01 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 22 , 201 4 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SHRI BRIJLAL AGARWALLA (HUF) AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , B HUBANESWAR PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 IN APPEAL MEMO NO. CIT/BBSR/263/56/2013 - 14/11 - 438 - 440 DATED 31 . 0 3 .20 1 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 9 - 1 0 . 2 . SHRI P.K. MISHRA, A.R., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K. AJAY KUMAR, CIT, D.R, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE . I.T.A. NO. 171 / CTK ./20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 9 - 20 1 0 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE A SSESSEE CAME TO BE COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2011. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE - HUF DERIVED INCOME FROM RETAIL TRADING OF CEMENT AND I RON R ODS. THE ASSESSING O FFICER AFTER CALLING ALL THE RECORDS AND DETAILS HAD PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 31.10.2011. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THIS ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF REVISION UNDER SECTION 263 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT HAD NOT CONSIDER ED ALL THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND THAT THE ASSESSING O FFICER HAD WHILE FINALISING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ACCEPTED THE FIGURE SHOWN ON THE TRADING AND P & L A/C WITHOUT MAKING ANY ENQUIRY. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THA T ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS HAD BEEN VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DETAILS HAD ALSO BEEN CALLED FOR. LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE VARIOUS NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS ALSO THE REPLIES FILED THEREON. LD. AR ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD EXAMINED THE LEDGER ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF THE TRANSPORT JOB WORK AS ALSO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND BANK ACCOUNTS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESS EE HAD PASSED HIS ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 HOLDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED ON 31.10.2011 AS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS NO PROPER ENQUIRY OR EXAMINATION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT HAS NO T DEMONSTRATED AS TO WHAT IS THE ERROR WHICH HA S CAUSED PREJUDIC E TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT TA LK S OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND THESE BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE SOURCES HAVE ALSO BEEN EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT WAS LIABLE TO QUASHED. 4 . IN REPLY, LD. CIT(D.R.) VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS ALSO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND THE REPLIES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE ALSO BEEN CONSIDERED. A PERUSAL OF THE SAME CLEARLY SHOWS THAT DETAILED ENQUIRY HAS BEEN DONE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THOUGH, IT MUST BE SAID THAT THE A SSESSMENT ORDER IS CRYPTIC , HOWEVER , IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSMENT I.T.A. NO. 171 / CTK ./20 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 9 - 20 1 0 PAGE 3 OF 3 HAS BEEN DONE IN A HAPHAZARD MANNER OR WITHOUT ENQUIRY. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 SHOWS THAT THE LD. CIT SAYS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CALLED FOR THE SOURCES OF THE CASH DEPOSITS FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN ASKED TO PRODUCE THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE SAME HAD ALSO BEEN PRODUCED. THE SOURCES IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS REPRESENTING THE TRANSPORT JOB WORK HAD ALSO BEEN EXAMINED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE MUST HOLD THAT THE ENQUIRY AND VERIFICATION HAS BEEN DONE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. FURTHER, LD. CIT HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY WHERE NOR DEMONSTRATED AS TO HOW THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ERRONEOUS OR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASHED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND OCTOBER , 2014. SD/ - SD/ - S .V. MEHROTRA GEORGE MATHAN ( ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ( JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 22 ND D AY OF OCTO BER , 201 4 COPIES TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE DEPARTMENT (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( 6 ) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK B ENCH, CUTTACK LAHA/SR. P.S.