ACIT, CHENNAI V. Sh. Emmanuel Gunaseelan. R, CHENNAI

ITA 1870/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73658 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAJI P JACOB IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: V SRINIVASAN ITP
• Keywords: Deemed dividend
• Section: 143(3); 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !' , # $! % BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENTAND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.1869, 1870 & 1871(MDS)/2013 # & '& / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. SHRI EMMANUEL GUNASEELAN.R., NO.211, PERIYAR PAADHAI, CHOOLAIMEDU, CHENNAI - 600 094. PAN : AACPE 5651 P (')/ APPELLANT) (+,')/ RESPONDENT) ') - / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, IRS, ADDL. CI T +,') - / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V. SRINIVASAN, ITP . - /0 / DATE OF HEARING : 13 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 12' - /0 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 / O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. TH E RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08. THESE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I AT CHENNAI, PASSED ON 12 TH AUGUST, 2013. THE APPEALS AROSE OUT OF THE ASSESS MENTS 2 I.T.A. NOS. 1869 TO 1871/MDS/13 COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 14 7 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE COMMON ISSUE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS IS THE QUESTION OF TREATING CERTAIN RECEIPTS, WHICH WERE THE AMOUNTS R ECEIVED FROM M/S BHARAT SCANS PVT. LTD., IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSE E AS DEEMED DIVIDEND UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E). IN THE CASE OF DR . BEULA EMMANUEL, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME ISSUE WAS RAISED BY THE REVENUE. THE ISSUE RAISED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08 WAS CONSIDERED BY ITAT, CHENNAI , IN I.T.A. NOS.2255, 2258 & 2259/MDS/2012. THE TRIBUNAL CONFIR MED THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) A ND HELD THAT THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY DR. BEULA EMMANUEL FROM M/S BHARAT SCANS PVT. LTD. WERE NOT IN THE NATURE OF DEEMED DI VIDEND UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E). 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN THE PRESENT CASES HAS ALSO FOLLOWED THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE CASE OF DR. BEU LA EMMANUEL, ON THE GROUND THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE CASES OF BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE ARE EXACTLY THE SAME . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED THE AP PEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3 I.T.A. NOS. 1869 TO 1871/MDS/13 4. NOW, THE REVENUE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS CONTEND ING THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE RECEIPTS BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S BHARAT S CANS PVT. LTD. ARE NOT COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22)( E). IT IS TO BE SEEN THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS RIGHTFULLY FOLLOWED THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE C ASE OF ASSESSEES WIFE UNDER SAME AND SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE S. THE ISSUE STANDS NOW COVERED BY THE ORDER OF ITAT, CHENNAI. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE TO HOLD THAT THE ORDERS PASS ED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN THESE THREE CASES ARE JUST AND PROPER. 5. IN RESULT, THESE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVE NUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THURSDAY, THE 13 TH OF FEBRUARY, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 13 TH FEBRUARY, 2014. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NOS. 1869 TO 1871/MDS/13 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT, CHENN AI-I, CHENNAI 4. CIT(A)-I, CHENNAI 5. DR 6. GF.