Shanta Sriram Constructions Private Limited , Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 188/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8454 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 23-02-2021
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment
• Section: 153A; 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 188 & 189/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07 & 2007-08 SHANTA SHRIRAM CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD [PAN: AADCS4180M] VS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI S.RAMA RAO, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 23-02-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24-03-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : THESE TWO ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR AYS.2006-07 & 2007 -08 ARISE FROM THE CIT(A)-3, HYDERABADS ORDER(S) DATED 0 9-11- 2018 PASSED IN APPEAL NOS.0229 & 0228/ DCIT-3(1) / HYD / CIT(A)-3 / 2016-17; RESPECTIVELY IN PROCEEDINGS U/S. 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [IN SHORT, THE ACT]. HEARD BOTH PARTIES. CASE FILES PERUSED. 2. IT TRANSPIRES AT THE OUTSET THAT THE ASSESSEES IDENTICAL SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN BOTH THESE APPEALS READ AS UNDER : 1) THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. ITA NOS. 188 & 189/HYD/2019 :- 2 -: 2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN R EJECTING THE APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE I.T.ACT FILED BY THE APP ELLANT. 3) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40(A )(IA) HAVE NO APPLICATION WHEN THE RECIPIENT ADMITTED THE SAME AS ITS INCOME AND DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITIONS MADE BY APPLYING T HE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40(A)(IA) OF THE I.T.ACT. 4) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING THE ASSESSM ENT U/S 153A, A NOTICE IS ISSUED; IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME A RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED AND THAT, THEREFORE, THE INCOME ADMITTING IN THE RE TURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A SHOULD BE THE BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT; 5) ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY CONTEND ED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT BOTH THE LEARNED LOW ER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN REJECTIN G THE ASSESSEES RECTIFICATION PETITIONS(S) PREFERRED ON THE G ROUND THAT SECTION 40(A)(IA)S AMENDMENT BY WAY OF 1 ST PROVISO CARRIES RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AS PER VIRGIN CREATIONS CASE ITA NO. 302/2011, G.A.NO.32000/2011. THE ASSESSEES CASE AP PEARS TO BE PRIMA FACIE JUSTIFIABLE AT THE FIRST INSTANCE. THE FACT HOWEVER, REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DECLIN ED ITS RECTIFICATION(S) FOR THE SOLE REASON THAT IT HAD ITSELF D ISALLOWED THE CORRESPONDING EXPENDITURE IN ITS COMPUTATION WHICH IS VERY MUCH EVIDENT FROM A PERUSAL OF THE FIRST ROUND ASSESSMENT DT.31-12-2009. AND THE VERY FACTUAL POSITIO N CONTINUED EVEN IN SECTION 143A R.W.S.143(3) ASSESSME NT DT.30- 12-2014 AS WELL. IT WAS THUS AN INSTANCE OF THE ASSESS EES COMPUTATION ITSELF HAVING BEING ACCEPTED AT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS END WITHOUT ANY MODIFICATION THEREIN. HON'BL E APEX COURTS LANDMARK DECISION IN T.S.BALARAM, ITO VS. M /S.VOLKART ITA NOS. 188 & 189/HYD/2019 :- 3 -: BROTHERS [82 ITR 50] (SC) HOLDS THAT A MISTAKE MUST BE AN APPARENT ONE THAN REQUIRING A LONGDRAWN PROCESS. WE TH US DECLINE BOTH THESE ASSESSEES APPEALS SEEKING RECTIFI CATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT. SUFFICE TO SAY IT IS MADE CLEAR THA T OUR INSTANT ADJUDICATION SHALL NOT BAR THE ASSESSEE FROM TAK ING RECOURSE TO APPROPRIATE REMEDY UNDER THE LAW; IF ANY. 4. THESE TWO ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED IN AB OVE TERMS. A COPY OF THIS COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN THE R ESPECTIVE CASE FILES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH MARCH, 2021 SD/- SD/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.G ODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER HYDERABAD, DATED: 24-03-2021 TNMM ITA NOS. 188 & 189/HYD/2019 :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1.SHANTA SRIRAM CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, 501, OASIS CENTRE, BEGUMPET MAIN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 2.THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD. 3.CIT(APPEALS)-3, HYDERABAD. 4.PR.CIT-3, HYDERABAD. 5.D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6.GUARD FILE.