Dinesh Mehta, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2424/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4156 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B NAVEEN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: B RAMANA KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI , ' , & ' BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.2418 TO 2424/MDS/2014 &' ' /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2000-01 TO 2006-07 SHRI DINESH R. MEHTA, 38, PRITHVI APARTMENTS, OPP. VASANTHI THEATRE, 149A, PERAMBUR BARRACKS ROAD, CHENNAI-600 007. VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II(1), CHENNAI-34 [PAN: AABPM 5995 K ] ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ) , / APPELLANT BY : MR.B.RAMANA KUMAR, FCA & ADV. *+) , /RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.NAVEEN KUMAR, JCIT , /DATE OF HEARING : 28.06.2017 , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.06.2017 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS (CENTRAL)-I, CH ENNAI, IN APPEAL NOS.75/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2000-01, NO.76/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2001-02, NO.77/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 ITA NOS.2418 TO 2424/MDS/2014 :- 2 -: FOR THE AY 2002-03, NO.78/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2003-04, NO.79/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2004-05, NO.80/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2005-06 & NO.81/2012-13 DATED 24.06.2014 FOR THE AY 2006-07. 2. SHRI B.NAVEEN KUMAR, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI B.RAMANA KUMAR, FCA & ADV. REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE AO WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUN AL HAD NOT PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS A SU BMISSION THAT THE AO IN SOME OF THE YEARS TREATED THE PURCHASES OF THE ASSE SSEE AS UNACCOUNTED PURCHASES AND THE TURNOVER AS UNACCOUNTED PROFITS. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT WHEN COMPUTING THE INTEREST U/S.234B, THE AO H AS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE TAXES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS. IT WAS A FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT THE AO HAS ALSO NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A WHOLE-SALE DEALER AND WAS HAVING CREDIT FACILITY. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT BEFORE THE LD.C IT(A) THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT REPRESENTED BY ANY COUNSEL BUT THE ASSESSEE HIM SELF HAD APPEARED AND HAD FILED A LETTER DATED 11.06.2014 TO THE LD.C IT(A) WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD ATTEMPTED TO EXPLAIN HIS ILL-HEALTH AN D FRUSTRATION IN REGARD TO THE ASSESSMENT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR T HAT HE HAS CO-RELATED ALL THE EVIDENCES IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITIONS AS MA DE IN THE ASSESSMENT ITA NOS.2418 TO 2424/MDS/2014 :- 3 -: AND IS IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN THE SAME BEFORE THE AO, IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT IN THE INTEREST O F NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT HAD RESULTED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BEING ASSESSED AT MORE THAN RS.125 CR. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT AFTER SET-ASID E BY THE ITAT OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDERS TO THE FILE OF THE AO, T HE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE NOW WAS ASSESSED AT NEARLY RS.18.5 CR. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY GOT ADEQUATE RELIEF. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE U PHELD. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE F ACT THAT THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE AYS 2000-01 TO 2006- 07 HAS COME DOWN FROM RS.125 CR. TO RS.18.5 CR. ON THE BASIS OF THE MERE EVIDENCES WHICH HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO ITSELF GIVEN GROUN D TO GRANT THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE FURTHER EV IDENCES, IF ANY, BEFORE THE AO. THE FACT THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DIS MISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ON THE BASIS OF THE LETTER FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE DATED 11.06.2014, READING OF WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THE FRUSTRATION OF T HE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF HIS ILL-HEALTH AND PREDICAMENT ALSO GIVES REASON THAT THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL MUST BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. NOT ONLY THIS, THE FACT THAT THE TOTAL PURCHASE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TREATED /ADDED AS UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE, AND ALSO TOTAL TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE AS ITA NOS.2418 TO 2424/MDS/2014 :- 4 -: UNACCOUNTED PROFITS A PRACTICAL IMPOSSIBILITY, WH ICH WOULD NEED RE- ADJUDICATION. THIS BEING SO, THE FACT THAT THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED THAT HE HAS BEEN ABLE TO COMPILE ALL THE D ETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT AND THAT HE WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN ALL THE ADDITIONS, IN THE INTEREST OF NATUR AL JUSTICE, THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-AD JUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE H IS CASE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E FOR THE AYS 2000-01 TO 2006-07 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPO SES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JUNE 30, 201 7, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( SANJAY ARORA ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ' ) (GEORGE MATHAN) & /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: JUNE 30, 2017. TLN , *&34 54 /COPY TO: 1. ) /APPELLANT 4. 6 /CIT 2. *+) /RESPONDENT 5. 4 *&& /DR 3. 6 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. ' /GF