Jagdishbhai Babubhai Patel, Surat V. The ACIT.,Circle-6, Surat

ITA 305/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: 30520514 RSA 2008
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-01-2012
• Assessment Year: 1990-1991
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G S SOURYAVANSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, A BENCH . .. . . .. . , !'# !'# !'# !'#, , , , $ $ $ $ . .. . . .. . %& %& %& %&, , , , '( ) '( ) '( ) '( ) ' # ' # ' # ' # BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND A. L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.303, 304 AND 305/AHD/2008 [ASSTT.YEAR : 1988-1989, 1989-1990 AND 1990-1991] JAGDISHBHAI BABUBHAI PATEL 403, GOVINDJI PALACE OPP: SARGAM SHOPPING CENTRE PARLE POINT, SURAT. /VS. ACIT, CIR.6 SURAT. ( (( (+, +, +, +, / APPELLANT) ( (( (-.+, -.+, -.+, -.+, / RESPONDENT) /& 0 1 '/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL ) 0 1 '/ REVENUE BY : SHRI G.S.SOURYAVANSHI 3 0 &4(/ DATE OF HEARING : 12 TH JANUARY, 2012 5%6 0 &4(/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-02-2012 '7 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THESE THREE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 1988-1989, 1989-1990 AND 1990-199 1 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X (APPEALS), SURAT. THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF WITH THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. IDENTICAL GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE RAISED EXCEPT C HANGE IN FIGURE OF AMOUNT FOR THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS, WHICH R EAD AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT THE LD.ACIT FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE TR UE MEANING OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WE LL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT HE OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT THE AP PELLANT HAS DISCHARGED HIS DUTY AND PROVED BEYOND ANY DOUBT THA T THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS ADDED IN THE YEAR UNDER QUESTION WAS DOUBLY TAXED. ITA NO.303, 304 AND 305/AHD/2008 -2- A.Y. AMOUNT (RS.) 1988-99 RS.3,18,000/- 1989-90 RS.3,66,300/- 1990-91 RS.1,12,150/- 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE THIRD ROUND OF LITIGATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L AND THE ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1415 , 1416 AND 1417/AHD/1999 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1988-1989, 1 989-1990 AND 1990-1991 VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 31-3-2003. HE SUB MITTED THAT SIMILAR DISPUTED AMOUNT HAS BEEN TAXED TWICE I.E. IN THE RE LEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS AND IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 1991-92 BY THE DEPARTME NT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL VIDE IT S ORDER DATED 31-3-2003 (SUPRA) HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO GRANT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT THE SAME AMOUNT OF INCOME HAS BEEN SUBJECTED T O TAX TWICE AND SHOULD GRANT RELIEF ACCORDINGLY IN A.Y.1991-92 IN T HE HANDS OF ALL THE CONNECTED PERSONS, IN WHOSE HANDS SUCH DOUBLE ADDIT IONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT OF INCOME ALREADY TAXED IN ANY OF T HESE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SU BMITTED THAT THE AO WRONGLY CONSIDERED THESE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL AS A SET ASIDE ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE FILE OF THE AO AND AGAIN MAD E THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH BY THE AO. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PE RUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y S. 1988-1989, 1989- 1990 AND 1990-1991 DATED 31-3-2003 (SUPRA). WE FI ND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS GIVEN DIRECTION IN PARA 5.5 OF THE ORDER AS UND ER: ITA NO.303, 304 AND 305/AHD/2008 -3- ...... THE AO SHOULD THEREFORE GRANT PROPER AND RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE BEFORE HIM BY PRODUCING PRECISE AND SPECIFIC DETAILS TO SHOW THAT ANY PART OF THE SUM OF RS.11 LAKHS TAXED IN AY 1991-92 HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO TAX TWICE AND SHOULD GRANT RELIEF ACCORDINGLY IN AY 1991-92 I N THE HANDS OF ALL THE CONNECTED PERSONS, IN WHOSE HANDS SUCH DOUB LE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT OF INCOME ALREADY TAXED I N ANY OF THESE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSES SEE. 5 . THESE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE NOT BEEN COM PLIED WITH BY THE AO. WE FIND THAT THE AO COULD NOT PROPERLY APP RECIATE THE DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIB UNAL. THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOWHERE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO A ND HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO GRANT PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEE TO PROVE BEFORE HIM THAT ANY ADDITION OF THE SUM OF RS.11 LAKHS TAX ED IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 1991-92 HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO TAX TWICE AND SHOULD GRANT RELIEF ACCORDINGLY IN A.Y.1991-92 IN THE HANDS OF THE CONN ECTED PERSONS, IN WHOSE HANDS SUCH DOUBLE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT OF INCOME ALREADY TAXED IN ANY OF THESE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERA TION, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. BY NOT COMPLYING WITH THE APPELLATE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL AND BY NOT RECORDING THE FINDINGS ON THE ISSUE THAT WHE THER THE IMPUGNED ADDITION HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED IN THE SUBSEQUENT A SSTT.YEAR 1991-92 BY THE DEPARTMENT, THE AO PUT THE ASSESSEE IN UNNECESS ARY LITIGATION BY FILING ANOTHER ROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THESE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE DIRECT THE AO TO GRANT PROPER AND REASONAB LE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE BEFORE HIM BY PRODUCING RELEVANT DETAILS TO SHOW THAT ANY PART OF THE SUM OF RS.11 LAKHS TAXED IN THE A.Y .1991-92 HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO TAX TWICE AND SHOULD GRANT RELIEF ACCO RDINGLY IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 1991-92 IN THE HANDS OF ALL THE CONNECTED PERSONS, IN WHOSE HANDS SUCH DOUBLE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPECT OF INCOM E ALREADY TAXED IN ITA NO.303, 304 AND 305/AHD/2008 -4- ANY OF THESE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE THREE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( . .. . . .. . %& %& %& %& /A.L. GEHLOT) '( ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !'# !'# !'# !'# /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD