DCIT, Chandigarh V. S.L. Arora, Mohali

ITA 231/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6516 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH ABROL
• Section: 153A; 147; 148

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 231/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 THE DCIT, VS. SHRI S.L. ARORA, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, H.NO. 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. ACLPA9483C C.O. NO.34/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 231/CHD/2015) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SHRI S.L. ARORA, VS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, H.NO. 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. ACLPA9483C ITA NO. 232/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 THE DCIT, VS. SHRI RAJIV KUMAR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, H.NO. 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. AFYPK8488H C.O. NO.35/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 232/CHD/2015) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SHRI RAJIV KUMAR, VS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, H.NO. 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. AFYPK8488H 2 ITA NO. 233/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 THE DCIT, VS. M/S KARAN EMPIRE PVT LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, # 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. AACCK7646P C.O. NO.36/CHD/2017 (IN ITA NO. 233/CHD/2015) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S KARAN EMPIRE PVT LTD., VS. THE DCIT, CENTRAL C IRCLE-1, # 123, PHASE 3-B-1, CHANDIGARH MOHALI PAN NO. AACCK7646P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. ASHISH ABROL RESPONDENT BY : SH. PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL DATE OF HEARING : 12.12.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.12.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CORRESPONDING CROSS OBJECTIONS BY THE RELATED ASSES SEES HAVE BEEN PREFERRED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]-3, G URGAON DATED 30.12.2014. 3 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED T HAT DUE TO THE SUBSEQUENT FACTUAL DEVELOPMENTS, HIS CROSS OBJECTIO NS MAY BE HEARD FIRST WHICH WILL HAVE A BEARING ON ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE. WE, ACCORDINGLY, PROCEED TO HEAR THE FOLLOWING IDENTICA L CROSS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEES:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE WORTHY CIT(A) IN APPEAL NO. 40C/CIT(A)(C)/GGN/2 013- 14 DATED 30.12.2014 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THAT ORDER IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, TO THE EXTENT OF NOT ALLOWING SOME OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. THAT ON FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 148 OF THE A CT, WHEREBY THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A HAS BEEN RE-OPENED, DESERVES TO BE DECLARED, ILLEGAL AND VOI D AB INITIO, SINCE THE INITIATION OF SAID ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/ S 153A HAS BEEN DECLARED ILLEGAL BY HON'BLE ITAT AND HENCE RE OPENING OF AN ILLEGALLY INITIATED ASSESSMENT IS ALSO ILLEGA L. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, HAS SUBMITTED THAT ORIGINALLY THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 153A OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') VIDE ORDER DATED 21.8.2009. S UBSEQUENTLY, THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE BY WAY OF ISSU ANCE OF NOTICE ON 16.3.2012 AND ON THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, C ERTAIN ADDITIONS WERE MADE VIDE ORDER DATED 31.3.2013. THE LD. COUNSEL H AS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED IN APPEAL THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE ACT. THE MATTER TRAVELLED UPTO THE LEVE L OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 22.12.2016 IN ITA NOS . 41/CHD/2011 & 4 OTHERS, HAS QUASHED THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ITSELF, BEING F RAMED UNDER THE INAPPROPRIATE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, TH E SUBSEQUENT REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AND ORDERS PASSED U/S 147 OF THE ACT HAVE NO LEGS TO STAND, WHEN THE VERY FOUNDATION UPON WHICH THE SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 READ WITH RULE 148 WERE INITIATED AND FINALIZED HAS CEASED TO EXIST, THE SUBSEQUENT ORDERS ACCORDINGLY CANNOT SURVIVE. 3. THE LD. DR HAS BEEN FAIR ENOUGH TO ADMIT THIS FA CTUAL POSITON. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE SUBSEQUENT ORDERS PASSED IN THE REOPENED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEING BECOME REDUNDANT AND A RE ORDERED TO THE QUASHED. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE, THUS, ALLOWED. IN VIEW OF THIS, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPEALS O F THE REVENUE AND THE SAME ARE ACCORDINGLY ORDERED TO BE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.12.2017 SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 12.12.2017 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR