The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji., Panaji V. M/s Andrew Telecommunication (P) Ltd., Goa

ITA 271/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3088 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S SUNDARESAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ARVIND SONDE
• Section: 54; 263; 63; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 271 /PNJ/201 5 (ASST. YEAR : 200 6 - 0 7 ) ACIT , CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI GOA. VS. M/S. ANDREW TELECOMMUNICATION S ( P ) LTD . , PLOT NO. N - 2, PHASE - IV, VERNA INDUSTR IAL ESTATE, VERNA, SALCETE, GOA . PAN NO. AABCA 8820 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO. 62 /PNJ/201 5 (ASST. YEAR : 200 6 - 0 7 ) M/S. ANDREW TELECOMMUNICATION S (P) LTD . , PLOT NO. N - 2, PHASE - IV, VERNA INDUSTR IAL ESTATE, VERNA, SALCETE, GOA . VS. ACIT , CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI GOA. PAN NO. AABCA 8820 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ARVIND SONDE ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : DR . S. SUNDARESAN - D R DATE OF HEARING : 21 / 0 1 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 / 0 1 /201 6 . O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 271/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , PANAJI - 1 I N I T A NO . 96/PNJ/ 14 - 15 , DAT ED 1 3/ 03/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 . 2 ITA NO. 2 7 1 /PNJ/201 5 C . O . N O . 6 2 / P N J / 2 0 1 5 C . O . N O . 6 2 / P N J / 2 0 1 5 I S A C R O S S O B J E C T I O N F I L E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE I N R E V E N U E S A P P E A L I N I T A N O . 2 7 1 / P N J / 2 0 1 5 . 2. S H R I AR V I N D S O N D E , A D V O C A T E R E P R E S E N T E D O N B E H A L F O F T H E ASSESSEE A N D D R . S . S U N D A R E S A N , DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE R E P R E S E N T E D O N B E H A L F O F T H E R E V E N U E . 3 . T H E ASSESSEE H A S F I L E D ADDITIONAL G R O U N D O N 0 4 / 0 9 / 2 0 1 5 , W H E R E I N ASSESSEE H A S R A I S E D T H E F O L L O W I N G G R O U N D : - T H E ASSESSING OFFICER H A S E R R E D I N P A S S I N G T H E ASSESSMENT ORDER 1 2 T H M A R C H , 2 0 1 4 W I T H O U T F O R W A R D I N G A D R A F T O F T H E P R O P O S E D O R D E R O F ASSESSMENT T O T H E ASSESSEE A N D T H E R E B Y N O T F O L L O W I N G T H E P R O C E D U R E L A I D D O W N I N S E C . 1 4 4 C O F T H E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 . T H E A P P E L L A N T S U B M I T S T H E O R D E R D A T E D 1 2 T H M A R C H 2 0 1 4 I S V O I D , B A D I N L A W , N O N E S T A N D A N U L L I T Y . 4 . A T T H E T I M E O F H E A R I N G , I T W A S S U B M I T T E D T H A T T H E S A I D ADDITIONAL G R O U N D G O E S T O T H E R O O T O F T H E ASSESSMENT A N D N O F A C T S A R E R E Q U I R E D T O B E V E R I F I E D . 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE O B J E C T E D T O T H E A D M I S S I O N O F T H E ADDITIONAL G R O U N D . 6 . W E H A V E C O N S I D E R E D T H E R I V A L S U B M I S S I O N S . A S I T I S N O T I C E D T H A T T H E ADDITIONAL G R O U N D G O E S T O T H E R O O T O F T H E ASSESSMENT , I N V I E W O F T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N T H E C A S E O F N A T I O N A L T H E R M A L P O W E R C O . LTD. VS. CIT R E P O R T E D I N 2 2 9 ITR 3 8 3 , T H E S A I D ADDITIONAL G R O U N D I S A D M I T T E D A N D D I S P O S E D O F . 7 . T H E ASSESSEE H A S A L S O F I L E D A N A F F I D A V I T D A T E D 0 8 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 5 I N S U P P O R T O F I T S ADDITIONAL G R O U N D , W H E R E I N I T I S S U B M I T T E D T H A T N O D R A F T ASSESSMENT O R D E R F O R T H E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 H A S B E E N R E C E I V E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE . T H E S A I D A F F I D A V I T W A S P U T T O T H E DEPARTMENTAL 3 ITA NO. 2 7 1 /PNJ/201 5 C . O . N O . 6 2 / P N J / 2 0 1 5 REPRESENTATIVE T O G E T T H E C O M M E N T S O F T H E ASSESSING OFFICER . T H E DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE H A S I N T I M A T E D T H A T T H E R E P L Y O F T H E ASSESSING OFFICER A S F O L L O W S : - 2 . I N C O N N E C T I O N W I T H T H E A B O V E , T H I S I S T O I N F O R M T H A T D R A F T O R D E R F O R O R D E R UNDER SEC. 1 4 3 ( 3 ) R . W . S . 1 4 4 C R . W . S . 2 5 4 R . W . S . 2 6 3 O F T H E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 D A T E D 1 2 / 0 3 / 2 0 1 4 I N T H E C A S E O F A N D R E W TELECOMMUNICATION I N D I A P V T . LTD. F O R A . Y . 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 , I S N O T F O U N D I N ASSESSMENT R E C O R D S , A S P E R T H I S O F F I C E R E C O R D S . T H E R E Q U I S I T E I N F O R M A T I O N A S K E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE I N A B O V E C I T E D L E T T E R D A T E D 0 4 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 6 . T H I S I S F O R K I N D INFORMATION A N D N E C E S S A R Y A C T I O N . I A M A L S O R E T U R N I N G H E R E W I T H T H E F I L E ( I N O N E D O C K E T ) W H I C H W A S F O R W A R D E D T O T H I S O F F I C E . 8 . I T W A S S U B M I T T E D B Y T H E AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE T H A T A S N O D R A F T ASSESSMENT ORDER H A S B E E N P A S S E D I N T H E C A S E O F T H E ASSESSEE A F T E R T H E S E T A S I D E P R O C E E D I N G S , I N V I E W O F T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE A N D H R A P R A D E S H HIGH COURT T H E C A S E O F M/S. Z U A R I C E M E N T LTD. VS. ACIT I N W . P . N O . 5 5 5 7 / 2 0 1 2 D A T E D 2 1 / 0 2 / 2 0 1 3 , T H E S L P A G A I N S T W H I C H , H A S B E E N D I S M I S S E D B Y T H E HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N C C N O . 1 6 6 9 4 / 2 0 1 3 D A T E D 2 7 / 0 9 / 2 0 1 3 , T H E ASSESSMENT ORDER W A S L I A B L E T O T H E Q U A S H E D . 9. I N R E P L Y , DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE V E H E M E N T L Y S U P P O R T E D T H E O R D E R O F T H E ASSESSING OFFICER . 10 . W E H A V E C O N S I D E R E D T H E R I V A L S U B M I S S I O N S . A S I T I S N O T I C E D T H A T T H E D R A F T ASSESSMENT ORDER H A S N O T B E E N P R O D U C E D B E F O R E U S T O C O U N T E R T H E S P E C I F I C A L L E G A T I O N S IN RESPECT OF N O N - A V A I L A B I L I T Y O F T H E D R A F T ASSESSMENT ORDER , W E A R E O F T H E V I E W T H A T T H E ASSESSMENT ORDER P A S S E D I S L I A B L E T O T H E A N N U L L E D , R E S P E C T F U L L Y F O L L O W I N G T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE A N D H R A P R A D E S H HIGH COURT I N T H E C A S E O F M/S. Z U A R I C E M E N T LTD . (SUPRA) , W H E R E I N I T H A S B E E N H E L D T H A T W H E R E T H E ASSESSMENT ORDER H A S B E E N P A S S E D C O N T R A R Y T O T H E M A N D A T O R Y P R O V I S I O N S O F S E C . 1 4 4 C O F 4 ITA NO. 2 7 1 /PNJ/201 5 C . O . N O . 6 2 / P N J / 2 0 1 5 T H E ACT A N D V I O L A T I O N T H E R E O F , T H E ASSESSMENT ORDER I S L I A B L E T O T H E D E C L A R E D A S O N E W I T H O U T JURISDICTION , N U L L A N D V O I D A N D U N E N F O R C E A B L E . 11 . IN THE RESULT, T H E ADDITIONAL G R O U N D F I L E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE S T A N D S A L L O W E D . 1 2 . C O N S E Q U E N T L Y , T H E O T H E R I S S U E S R A I S E D I N T H E A P P E A L O F T H E R E V E N U E A N D T H E C R O S S O B J E C T I O N O F T H E ASSESSEE I S N O T A D J U D I C A T E D U P O N . 1 3 . I N T H E R E S U L T , A P P E A L O F T H E R E V E N U E I S D I S M I S S E D A N D T H E C R O S S O B J E C T I O N O F T H E ASSESSEE I S A L L O W E D . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON T H U R S D A Y , THE 2 1 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 6 AT GOA . S D / - S D / - (N.S.SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 1 TH JANUARY , 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE. 2 . THE REVENUE. 3 . THE CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R . 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI .