Smt. Neelaben A.Rathod, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2486/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0568 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L CHANDEL
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2485/AHD/2011 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SMT. KAMLABEN L. RATHOD, C/O V K MOONDRA CA, 201, SARAP, OPP NAVJIVAN PRESS, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN : ADSPR 5910 M VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), AHMEDABAD ./ ITA NO. 2486/AHD/2011 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SMT. NEELABEN A RATHOD, C/O V K MOONDRA CA, 201, SARAP, OPP NAVJIVAN PRESS, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN : ADSPR 5912 K VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), AHMEDABAD / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI VINIT MOONDRA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI S.L. CHANDEL, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 06/09/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07/09/2016 / O R D E R THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XI, AHMEDABAD OF EVEN DATED 15.07.2011 FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08. SINCE COMMON ISSUE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS, THESE AP PEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLID ATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE CONCISE GROUND RAISED IN THESE APPEALS PERTA INS TO ADDITION OF RS.8,00,000/- IN THE CASE OF SMT. NILABEN RATHOD AN D RS.10,00,000/- IN THE CASE OF SMT. KAMLABEN RATHOD, BOTH MADE U/S 69 OF T HE ACT. SMC-ITA NOS. 2485 & 2486/AHD/2011 SMT. KAMLABEN RATHOD & SMT NEELABEN RATHOD VS. ITO AY : 2007-08 2 3. BRIEF FACTS ARE BOTH THE ASSESSEES ALLEGEDLY M ADE ABOVE INVESTMENTS IN ONE COMPANY M/S ADARSH ENGITECH PROJECTS PVT LTD , UDAIPUR. ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT SHRI SH ANTILAL JAIN, THE DIRECTOR OF M/S ADARSH ENGITECH PROJECTS PVT LTD HAS BUILT-U P SOME CAPITAL WITH THE HELP OF THE NAME-LENDERS INCLUDING THESE TWO ASSESS EES. 3.1. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES STATES THAT THE SAID SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN HAS ACCEPTED ALL THESE AMOUNTS AS HIS MONEY AND THE ASSESSEES ARE AS NAME- LENDERS. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES, HOWEVER, C OULD NOT GIVE THE LATEST STATUS OF THE FATE OF SUBSTANTIVE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF THE SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN, DIRECTOR OF M/S. ADARSH ENGITECH PROJECT PVT L TD. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES FURTHER CONTENDS THAT SINCE SHRI SHANTILA L JAIN IN SUBSTANTIVE CAPACITY HAS ACCEPTED THE ADDITION, THE IMPUGNED AS SESSMENT BEING PROTECTIVE IN NATURE, THIS ADDITION SHOULD BE DELET ED. 3.2 LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY CONTENDS THAT LD. COUNSEL HAS NOT LAID ANY EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE ADDITIONS IN QUESTION HAVE BECOME SUBSTANTIVE IN THE HANDS OF SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN AND THE RELEVANT INCOME-TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID. THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS SHOULD BE CONFIRMED IN THE HANDS OF THESE ASSESSEES. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUT HORITIES. FROM THE RECORD, IT EMERGES THAT THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MAD E IN THE HANDS OF SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN; HOWEVER, WHETHER THE APPEALS HAVE BE EN FILED AND THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DISPUTED BY SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN HA S NOT BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD. THE SUBSTANTIVE ASSESSMENT IS IN THE HANDS OF SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN AND PROTECTIVE ASSESSMENT IS IN THE HANDS OF THESE TWO ASSESSEES. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I FIND IT FIT TO SET ASIDE THESE ASSESSMENTS BACK SMC-ITA NOS. 2485 & 2486/AHD/2011 SMT. KAMLABEN RATHOD & SMT NEELABEN RATHOD VS. ITO AY : 2007-08 3 TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO AND DIRECT HIM TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER EXAMINING THE FINALITY OF THE ADDITIONS IN THE HAN DS OF SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN. 5. SINCE THE ONLY ISSUE BEING RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO, THE LIMITATION WILL NOT APPLY TILL THE VERIFICATION IN THE CASE OF SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN IS DONE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD; DATED 07/09/2016 *BIJU T. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD