P.Suyambu, Nagercoil V. ACIT, Madurai

ITA 211/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9268 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K RAVI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Notional interest

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , ! ', $ %& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.210, 211, 212 & 213/MDS/2016 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06 TO 2008-09 SHRI P. SUYAMBU, NO.6, SIVA ILLAM, CHIDAMBARANATHAN STREET, NAGERCOIL. PAN : ASZPS 3610 B V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE I, MADURAI. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SH. K. RAVI, ADVOCATE -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 28.04.2016 34) / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.05.2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ALL THE FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHENNAI, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2008-0 9. SINCE COMMON ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN ALL THESE APPEALS, WE 2 I.T.A. NOS.210 TO 213/MDS/16 HEARD THESE APPEALS TOGETHER AND DISPOSING OF THE S AME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. SHRI K. RAVI, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, S UBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A MASTER GRADUATE IN LAW AND TRUSTE E OF A CHARITABLE TRUST AT NAGERCOIL. DURING THE RESPECTI VE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE RE ARE SUNDRY DEBTORS FOR WHICH NO SCHEDULE OR THE DETAILS OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED WAS NOT AVAILABLE. TH EREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED I NVESTMENT AND COMPUTED THE NOTIONAL INTEREST AT 24% AND MADE ADDI TION TO THE TOTAL INCOME. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH, WHAT IS D IFFICULTY FOR THE ASSESSEE IN GIVING DETAILS REGARDING THE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THE SUNDRY DEBTORS? THE LD.COUNSEL FAIRLY SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS READY AND WILLING TO FURNISH THE NAMES, ADDRESS AND OTHER DETAILS OF SUNDRY DEBTORS FOR EXAMINATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. WE HAVE HEARD SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, THE LD. DEPA RTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH REGARD TO SO- 3 I.T.A. NOS.210 TO 213/MDS/16 CALLED SUNDRY DEBTORS FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CA ME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE SUNDRY DEBTORS MAY BE UNDISCLOS ED INVESTMENT. NO EVIDENCE WAS FILED EVEN BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE LD. D.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS SEARCH IN THE PREM ISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 04.05.2007. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATE RIAL WITH REGARD TO NAMES, ADDRESS AND OTHER DETAILS OF SUNDR Y DEBTORS, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS CONFIRMED THE NOTIONAL INTEREST CO MPUTED AND ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SID E AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND TH E LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, THE ADDITION WAS MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS WITH REGARD TO NAMES AND ADD RESS OF SO- CALLED SUNDRY DEBTORS. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CON SIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO NECESSARILY FURNISH THE NA MES AND ADDRESS OF THE SUNDRY DEBTORS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION. NOW, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MADE A STATEME NT BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL THAT THE ASSESSEE IS WILLING AND READY TO FURNISH THE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THE SUNDRY DEBTORS BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS TRIBUNAL I S OF THE CONSIDERED 4 I.T.A. NOS.210 TO 213/MDS/16 OPINION THAT GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASS ESSEE TO FURNISH THE NAMES, ADDRESS AND OTHER DETAILS OF THE SUNDRY DEBTORS MAY NOT PREJUDICE THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE IN ANY WAY. ON THE OTHER HAND, GIVING SUCH OPPORTUNITY WOULD DEFINITELY PROM OTE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ADDI TION ON ACCOUNT OF NOTIONAL INTEREST ON THE SUNDRY DEBTORS IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH ON THE BASIS OF DETAILS WITH REGARD TO SUNDRY DEBTORS THAT WOULD BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH L AW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 26 TH MAY, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' ) ( ... ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 26 TH MAY, 2016. KRI. 5 I.T.A. NOS.210 TO 213/MDS/16 / -278 98)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 :2 () /CIT(A)-19, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-2, CHENNAI 5. 8; -2 /DR 6. <( = /GF.