Tapas Dutta, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-1(2), Hooghly, Hooghly

ITA 1935/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5055 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MD GHAYAS UDDIN
• Assessee Lawyers: TAPAS DUTTA
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Revised return
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1935/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1935/KOL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 TAPAS DUTTA,....................................... .............................APPELLANT ADVOCATE, NICCO HOUSE, 2, HARE STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 [PAN: AFAPD 7106 D] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ .....................RESPONDENT WARD-1(2), HOOGHLY, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, G.T. ROAD, KHADINAMORE, CHINSURAH, HOOGHLY-712 101 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI TAPAS DUTTA, ADVOCATE, FOR THE ASSESSEE MD. GHAYAS UDDIN, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 09, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 24, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXVI, KOLKATA DATED 30.08.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THIS CASE GIVING RISE TO T HIS APPEAL ARE AS FOLLOWS:- THE ASSESESE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, WHO FILED HIS RETUR N OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ORIGINALLY ON 28.08.2002 D ECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.54,750/-. THEREAFTER A REVISED RETURN WAS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 20.03.2003 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.96,050/-. S INCE THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 28.08.2002 WAS BEYO ND THE DUE DATE, THE REVISED RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY O N 20.03.2003 WAS HELD I.T.A. NO. 1935/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 PAGE 2 OF 3 TO BE INVALID BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND IN ORDER TO REGULARIZE THE SAME, A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS ISSUED BY HIM TO THE ASSESSEE ON 30.03.2006. IN PURSUANCE OF THE SAID NOTICE, ASSESS MENT UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 144 WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER DATED 31.12.2007 ASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1,09,999/-. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 144 READ WITH SECTION 147, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY T HE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF THE SA ID ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS DISPUTING THE ADDITION OF RS.14,999/- MADE THEREIN ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED ASSET. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, D ID NOT FIND MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE DISMISSED THE SAME. AGGRIEVED BY THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THIS APPE AL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A PRELIMINARY ISSUE CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(1) HAVING BEEN ALREADY COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON 04.07.2003 ON THE INCOME OF RS.96,050/- AS DECLARED IN THE REVISE D RETURN FILED ON 20.03.2003, THERE WAS NO ESCAPEMENT OF ANY INCOME F ROM THE ASSESSMENT AND THE REOPENING MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 TO REGULARIZE THE REVISED RETURN OF INC OME WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. I FIND MERIT IN THIS CONTENTIO N OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IT IS OBSERVED THAT IN THE INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(1) ON 04.07.2003, THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.96,050 /- AS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVISED RETURN FILED ON 20.03.2003 WAS ALREADY ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESS EE AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF ANY ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS DECLARED IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME. EVEN IF IT IS ASSU MED THAT THE REVISED RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS INVALID, THE INCOM E DECLARED THEREIN I.T.A. NO. 1935/KOL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 PAGE 3 OF 3 HAVING BEEN ALREADY ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE AS SESSEE, THERE WAS NO ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME FROM THE ASSESSMENT, WHICH GAV E AN AUTHORITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT IN T HE GUISE OF REGULARIZING THE REVISED RETURN. IN THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN MY OPINION, COULD N OT HAVE ANY BELIEF ABOUT THE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME ON THE BASIS OF THE REVISE D RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AS MADE BY HIM WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. I, THEREFORE, CANCEL THE ASSES SMENT MADE BY HIM UNDER SECTION 144/147 BY TREATING THE SAME AS INVAL ID AND DECIDE THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS AP PEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FEBRUARY 24, 2016. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 24 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) TAPAS DUTTA, ADVOCATE, NICCO HOUSE, 2, HARE STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), HOOGHLY, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, G.T. ROAD, KHADINAMORE, CHINSURAH, HOOGHLY-712 101 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XXXVI, KO LKATA (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.