ACIT, Central Circle - 4, Hyderabad V. Sri Kantilal Agarwal, Hyderabad

ITA 250/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8982 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: B SAI PRASAD

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P. M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.250/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4 HYDERABAD. VS. MR. KANTILAL AGARWAL HYDERABAD. PAN AAAPA3053K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : MR. RAMAKRISHNA BANDI FOR ASSESSEE : MR. B. SAI PRASAD DATE OF HEARING : 27.01.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.01.2015 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-VII, HYDERABAD DATED 30.11.2011 W AS DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH OTHER APPEAL S VIDE ITS COMMON ORDER DATED 28.03.2014. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE DEPARTMENT MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION O F THE SAID ORDER AND VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 19.09.2014 PASSED IN M.A.NO.134/HYD/2014, THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE SAID APPLICATION AND RECALLED ITS ORDER DATED 28.03.2014 PASSED IN ITA.NO.250/HYD/2012 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF RECO RDING FINDING WITH REGARD TO GROUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 RAISED B Y THE DEPARTMENT BY OBSERVING AS UNDER : 2 ITA.NO.250/HYD/2012 MR. KANTILAL AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. THOUGH, IT MAY BE A FACT THAT WHILE DECIDING GROUND NOS. 2 TO 5 OF ASSE SSEES CROSS APPEAL IN ITA.NO.262/HYD/2012, THE TRIBUNAL H AS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE, WHICH ALSO AROSE IN DEPARTMEN TS GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 AS RAISED IN ITA.NO.250/HYD/201 4, BUT, WHILE DISMISSING THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL BY INADVERTENCE HAS FAILED TO RECORD ANY F INDING IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID TWO GROUNDS. HENCE, THE RE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AS ENVISAGED U/S.254 (2) OF THE ACT. WE, THEREFORE, RE CALL THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2014 PASSED IN ITA.NO.250/HYD/201 2 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF RECORDING THE FINDING WI TH REGARD TO GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 RAISED BY THE DEPARTM ENT. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 27.01.2015. AS BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN TH E OPEN COURT ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING, NO SEPARATE N OTICE NEED TO BE SENT TO THE PARTIES. 2. GROUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN IT S APPEAL BEING ITA.NO.250/HYD/2012 READ AS UNDER : 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RELYING ON ONLY ONE DOCUMENT AND IGNORING OTHER SEIZED MATERIAL CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-MIP/A/2 WHICH CONTAINS FULL DETAILS OF THE TRANSACTION RELATED TO ACQUISIT ION OF M/S. MAA SPONGE IRON (P) LTD., BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE LIABILITIES OF MAA SACHIYA SPONGE IRON (P) LTD., WHICH WERE DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ACQUISITION OF M/S. MAA SACHIYA SPONGE IRON (P) LTD., 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES O N THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN GROUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 OF THE R EVENUES APPEAL. AS AGREED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES, THE COMMON ISSUE WAS INVOLVED IN GROUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL AND GROUND NOS. 2 TO 5 OF A SSESSEES CROSS-APPEAL BEING ITA.NO.262/HYD/2012 AND THE SAME AS INVOLVED IN ASSESSEES APPEAL WAS SPECIFICALLY DEAL T WITH BY THE 3 ITA.NO.250/HYD/2012 MR. KANTILAL AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. TRIBUNAL IN PARAGRAPHS 33 TO 38 OF ITS ORDER BEFORE ULTIMATELY RESTORING THE SAME TO THE FILE OF A.O. WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS AS GIVEN IN PARAGRAPH NO.39. AS FURTHER AGREED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF BOTH THE SIDES, THE FINDINGS RECO RDED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL O N THIS ISSUE ARE EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN GR OUNDS NO. 2 AND 3 OF REVENUES APPEAL. WE ACCORDINGLY TREAT GRO UNDS NO. 2 AND 3 OF REVENUE APPEAL AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENT APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.01.2015. SD/- SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 28 TH JANUARY, 2015 VBP/- COPY TO 1. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, 8 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD-50000 4. 2. MR. KANTILAL AGARWAL, 21-2-631, URDUGALLI, HYDERABA D. 3. CIT(A)-VII, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. I.T.A.T. A BENCH, HYDERABAD.