Smt. Savita Devi Mahavidyalay, Meerut V. ITO, Meerut

ITA 1954/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6208 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1); 68; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (MEERUT CAMP, MEERUT) BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1954/DEL./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SMT. SAVITA DEVI MAHAVIDYALAY VS. ITO, RUN BY SHATABDI SHIKSHA PRASAR SABHA WARD -2(3) B-109 SHASTRI NAGAR, MEERUT, MEERUT U.P. UTTAR PRADESH (PAN : AADAS8139A APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SH. DINESH MOHAN SINHA, SH. RAJEEV K UMAR SHARMA,ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI M.R.BIHAGRA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 11.01.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 25.01.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT SMT. SAVITA DEVI MAHAVIDYALAY , MEERUT (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ASSESSEE') BY FILING THE AFORES AID APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21/02/2017 PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-MEERUT QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT : 1. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT ( A) MEERUT, UP, HAS ACCEPTED THE INITIAL GROUNDS OF APP EAL BUT REJECTED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED THEREAFTER, WH EREIN THE COUNSEL OF THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE CHALLENGED RE-OPE NING OF THE CASE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.1954/DEL./2017 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A MEERUT, U.P., ERRED IN CONFI RMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED DEPOSIT CASH OF RS. 52,70,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THAT WHILE SUSTAINING THE ABOVE SAID ADDITI ONS THE LD. CIT (A) MEERUT, U.P. OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THERE WAS NO VALID MATERIAL OR BASIS FOR HAVING MAD E THE SAID ADDITIONS WHICH IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THAT SINCE THE PROCEEDINGS IS THAT OF A SOC IETY AND NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL THERE IS NO QUESTION IN FURNIS HING THE INFO/APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A , BECAUSE THE VERY FIRST ORDER PASSED BY THE AO, WARD 2 (3) MEERUT IS BAD IN LAW BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY AND NOT AN INDIVIDUAL. THAT THE LD. A.O. ERRED IN LAW AND FACT IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 52,70,000/- AS INCOME FRO M UNDISCLOSED SOURCES, JUST ON IMAGINATION & WITHOUT HAVING ANY DETAIL / SOURCE WHATSOEVER. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THAT THE LD. CIT (A) MEERUT HAS ERRED IN LA W WHILE JUSTIFYING THE TREATMENT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME BY N OT EVEN MENTIONING IN THE ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AN INDIVIDUAL AS HAS BEEN TREATED BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER, WARD 2 (3) MEERUT, AND DID NOT EVEN LISTEN AND TAKE INTO ACCOUNTS THE AVERMENTS MADE BY THE COUNSEL OF THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE. ITA NO.1954/DEL./2017 3 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, DELETE, MODIFY OR ALTER THE PLEAS AND GROUNDS AS TAKEN. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THAT FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDI CATION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSEE BEING A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETY REGISTRATION ACT IS RUNNING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION NAMELY SAVITA DEVI MAHAVIDYALAYA AFFILIATED WITH C.C.S UNIVERSITY MEER UT U.P. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147/ 144 OF THE ACT ON FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH NECESSARY DOCUME NTS CALLED FOR VIDE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 142(1) BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 52,70,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF THE UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) BY W AY OF FILING THE APPEAL WHO HAS DISMISSED THE SAME. FEELING AGGRIEVE D THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PR ESENT APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN THE LIGHT OF THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN TH IS CASE U/S 144/147 OF THE ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO CLA IMS TO HAVE ISSUED NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE ON DIFFERENT DATES AND ON ITS FAILURE TO PUT AN APPEARANCE PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144/147 OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE WITHOUT MOVING AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES SOUGHT TO BRING ON RECORD CERTAIN DOCUMENTS TO EXP LAIN THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE SAVING ACCOUNT WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECLINE D. 6. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID UNDISPUTED FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THE CASH D EPOSIT IN ITS BANK ITA NO.1954/DEL./2017 4 ACCOUNT, STATED THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ON ACCOUNT OF FEES RECEIVED FROM STUDENTS AND THE INTE REST ACCRUED ON THE SAID AMOUNT WHICH WAS ALSO SUBJECTED TO TDS AS PER TDS C ERTIFICATE ENCLOSED. IN THE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERE D VIEW THAT ON ACCOUNT OF NEGLIGENCE OR INEFFICIENCY OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE IN NOT MOVING APPLICATION U/R 46A, ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE MADE T O SUFFER. SO, IN ORDER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY ONCE FOR ALL, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST BE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUA TE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY BRINGING ON RECORD THE SUPPORTING DO CUMENTS, HENCE, THE CASE IS REQUIRED TO THE REMANDED BACK TO THE AO TO DECIDE AND AFRESH BY PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSE SSEE. WE, ORDER ACCORDINGLY. CONSEQUENTLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH JANUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 25/01/ 2019 BR COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-XXVI, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI. ITA NO.1954/DEL./2017 5 DATE OF DICTATION 15.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 16.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 16.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 25.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 25.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS 25.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 25.01.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER