Mahavir Swami Digamber Jain Mumukshu Trust, Vapi V. The ACIT.,Valsad Circle, Valsad

ITA 3027/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 302720514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B L YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: H V VORA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reason to believe
• Section: 12A; 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH MAHAVIR SWAMI DIGAMBER JAIN MUMUKSHU TRUST, UNNATI, BHAGYODAY SOCIETY, DAMAN ROAD, CHALA, VAPI 396191 PAN: AABTS7483A (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, VALSAD CIRCLE, VALSAD. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI H.V. VORA, A.R. REVENUE BY: SRI B.L. YADAV, SR .D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 17-09-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17-09-20 13 / ORDER PER : B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THESE THREE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ARISING F ROM THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), VALSAD, DATED 30.09.2011 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07. THE GROUNDS OF THE AP PEAL IN ALL THE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND THEREFORE, I AM TAKING UP ALL THE TH REE APPEALS TOGETHER BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS SIX GROUNDS IN EACH APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF THE RE- ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE IT ACT. ITA NO. 3027, 3028 & 3029/AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07 I.T.ANO. 3027,3028, 3029/AHD/2011, A.Y. 2008-0 9 PAGE MAHAVIR SWAMI DIGAMBER JAIN MUMUKSHU VS. ACIT 2 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. H.V. VORA, AT THE OUTSET, ARGUED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS BUT HAS CONFIRMED THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE IT ACT. IN THIS REGARD, HE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 1 OF T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN WHICH THE AO HAS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEES APPL ICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST U/S. 12A WAS REJECTED. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED FOR ANY DEDUCTION U/S. 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. ACCORD INGLY, THE CASE WAS REOPENED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT AND NOTICE U/S.148 DAT ED 29.9.2008 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. AS THERE WAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX FOR THE IMPUGNED YEAR HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. LEARNED AR ARGUED THAT ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 3.4.2009 H AS GRANTED THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, IN ITA NO.3520/AHD /2008 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, THE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS PLACED ON RECO RD. THEREFORE, THE VERY REASON ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE ASSESSMENT WAS REO PENED HAS GONE AND THEREFORE, THE REOPENING BY THE AO WAS BAD IN LAW A ND HE PRAYED TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT SO MADE BY THE AO. 3. LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARGUED THAT THE O RDER OF THE ITAT DOES NOT MENTION THE DATE OF REGISTRATION GRANTED U /S. 12A OF THE ACT. THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IS DATED 3.4.2009 WHEREAS THE IMP UGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07, THEREFORE, HE PRA YED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON LEGAL GROUNDS. SINCE AN OR DER OF ITAT DATED 3.4.2009 OF THE REGISTRATION IS DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION WHICH IN FACT IS ALSO N OT ON RECORD. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE FA CT THAT THE AO HAS REOPENED I.T.ANO. 3027,3028, 3029/AHD/2011, A.Y. 2008-0 9 PAGE MAHAVIR SWAMI DIGAMBER JAIN MUMUKSHU VS. ACIT 3 THE ASSESSMENT OF THE THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS ON THE BASIS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. ON THE BASIS OF THAT THE APPLICATION F OR REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE U/S.12A WAS REJECTED AND ACCORDINGLY THE C ASE WAS REOPENED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS. THE ITAT VI DE ITS ORDER DATED 3.4.2009 HAS GRANTED THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12A TO THE ASSESS EE. THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD THAT THE DATE OF GRANTING OF THE REGISTRATIO N BY THE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 3.4.2009 IS THAT WHETHER THE SAME IS APPLICAB LE TO THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS OR NOT. BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE SHOW N THEIR UNWILLINGNESS TO PLACE THE DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE BENCH ON THE DATE. A CCORDINGLY, THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO WIL L EXAMINE THE RECORD AND GIVE A FINDING WITH REGARD TO THE DATE OF REGISTRAT ION U/S 12A WHETHER THE SAID REGISTRATION IS APPLICABLE TO THE IMPUGNED YEA R OR NOT AND ACCORDINGLY DECIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO BUT BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO WILL DE CIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS IN ITA NO.3027, 3 028 AND 3029/AHD/2011 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17-09-2013 (B. P. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED /09/2013 PRABHAT KR. KESARWANI I.T.ANO. 3027,3028, 3029/AHD/2011, A.Y. 2008-0 9 PAGE MAHAVIR SWAMI DIGAMBER JAIN MUMUKSHU VS. ACIT 4 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,