Sh. Chetan Gupta, Firozabad V. I.T.O.-5(1), Firozabad

ITA 224/AGR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6873 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S D SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKUR AGARWAL
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.: 224,225 AND 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PAGE 1 OF 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA SMC BENCH, AGRA [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM] I.T.A. NO.: 224/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 CHETAN GUPTA .APPELLANT C/O NEW BRIGHT GLASS WORKS BEHIND UPSEB, SUHAG NAGAR FIROZABAD [PAN: ADFPG5856L] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), FIROZABAD .RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO.: 225/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 MOHIT GUPTA .APPELLANT C/O NEW BRIGHT GLASS WORKS BEHIND UPSEB, SUHAG NAGAR FIROZABAD [PAN: ABEPG9393B] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), FIROZABAD .RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO.: 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 NIDHI GUPTA .APPELLANT C/O NEW BRIGHT GLASS WORKS BEHIND UPSEB, SUHAG NAGAR FIROZABAD VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), FIROZABAD .RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO.: 224,225 AND 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PAGE 2 OF 5 APPEARANCES BY: ANURAG SINHA AND ANKUR AGARWAL , FOR THE APPELLANT S D SHARMA , FOR THE RESPONDENT O R D E R ITA NO. 224/AGRA/ 2014 1. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE EX PARTE ORDER DATED 11 TH FEBRUARY 2014 PASSED BY THE CIT (A) IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSM ENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL, ONLY A FEW MATER IAL FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NOTE OF. THIS IS A CASE IN WHICH ASSESSMENT HAS BEE N REOPENED ON THE GROUND THE ASSESSEE HAS THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED AN ACCOMMOD ATION ENTRY OF RS 2,45,685 FROM ONE M K M FINSEC PVT LTD. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE OBJECTED TO THE REASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, AND, ON MERITS, SUBMITTED EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF GENUINENE SS OF THE SHARE SALE TRANSACTION IN QUESTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HO WEVER, REJECTED ALL THESE SUBMISSIONS. THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT DISTINCTIV E NUMBERS OF SHARES SAID TO HAVE BEEN SOLD ARE DIFFERENT IN THE SHARE CERTIFICA TE AND THE BROKERS ADVICE. THE AO ALSO NOTED THAT THE SHARE BROKER DID NOT RESPOND TO THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE AO. ON THESE FACTS, THE AO INFERRED THAT THE TR ANSACTION IN QUESTION WAS NOT GENUINE. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. LEARNED CIT(A), IN A VERY DETAILED BUT EX PARTE ORDER, I.T.A. NO.: 224,225 AND 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PAGE 3 OF 5 DISMISSED THE GRIEVANCES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AS ALSO THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 4. IN SUBSTANCE, ASSESSEES CONTENTION IS TWO FOLD- FIRST, THAT THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE IS BAD IN LAW INASMUCH AS ON MATERIALLY IDENTICAL FACTS OF THE CASE, DIVISION BENCHES OF TH IS TRIBUNAL HAVE QUASHED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AND SECOND, THAT THE AU THORITIES BELOW HAVE NOT POINTED OUT ANY LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE OBJECTIONS TO T HE EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF GENUINENESS OF THIS TRANSACTION, PARTICULARLY AS AL LEGED DIFFERENCE IN DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS IS INCORRECT ON FACTS. HOWEVER, ON NONE OF THESE ASPECTS, THERE IS ANY ADJUDICATION BY THE CIT(A) AS THE MATTER WAS DECIDE D EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. WHEN IT WAS POINTED OUT TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT I AM NOT INCLINED TO DEAL WITH AN ASPECT OF THE MATTER WHICH HAS NOT BEEN EXA MINED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ASSURES ME THAT GIVEN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY, HE WILL FULLY COOPERATE IN EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF APPEAL ON MERITS AND ENSURE SCRUPULOUS COMPLIANCE WITH NOTICES OF HE ARING BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). HE SEEKS ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HI S CASE TO THE LEARNED CIT(A), PARTICULARLY AS THERE IS NO ADJUDICATION ON ANY OF THE ABOVE TWO ASPECTS. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT OPPOSE THE PRAYER FOR THE MATTER BRING REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER ET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BUT ADDS THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO FULLY COOPERATE IN EXPEDITIOU S DISPOSAL OF REMANDED I.T.A. NO.: 224,225 AND 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PAGE 4 OF 5 PROCEEDINGS. IN VIEW OF THIS FACTUAL POSITION, I DE EM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICA TION AFTER GIVING YET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND SPECIFIC ALLY DEALING WITH SUCH CONTENTIONS AS THE ASSESSEE MAY TAKE UP ON THE ISS UE OF JURISDICTION AS ALSO ON MERITS. I, THEREFORE, REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTIONS AS ABOVE, AND, AS I AM DOING SO, REFRAIN FROM MAKING ANY OBSERVATIONS ON MERITS. I FURTHER DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PROPERL Y COOPERATE IN EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF REMANDED PROCEEDINGS, FAILING WHICH THE CIT(A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE THE MATTER BASED ON MATERIAL ON RECORD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. IT WAS SO PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT IMMEDIATELY UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. ITA NOS. 225 AND 226/AGRA/ 2014 6. LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT WHATEV ER IS DECIDED IN THE CASE OF CEHTAN GUPTA IN ITA NO. 224/AGRA/2014 WILL EQUAL LY APPLY IN THESE TWO CASES AS WELL, AS ALL THE MATERIAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE, BARRING A VARIATION OF QUANTUM OF ADDITIONS, ARE THE SAME. VI DE MY ORDER ABOVE, I HAVE REMITTED THE ABOVE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, IN THESE CASES ALSO, I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE SAME DIRECTIONS. MY DIRECTIONS ABOVE WILL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO THESE CASES AS WELL. I.T.A. NO.: 224,225 AND 226/ AGRA/ 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PAGE 5 OF 5 7. IN THE RESULT, THESE TWO APPEALS ARE ALSO ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE SAME TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. IT WAS SO PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT IMMEDIATELY UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- PRAMOD KUM AR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AGRA. DATED 31 ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014. COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPO NDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA