ITO, Ward - 36(2), Kolkata, Kolkata V. M/s. Shree Subham Exports, Kolkata

ITA 31/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 48230 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PARAMANIK
• Assessee Lawyers: S K KANDOI
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , , , , , ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA [ . . . . . .. . , , ! ! ! ! , ] [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, AM & HONBLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM !' !' !' !' / I.T.A. NO. 31/KOL/2011 #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& #$ %&/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-36(2) -VS.- M/S. SHREE SUBHAM EXPORTS KOLKATA. KOLKATA [PAN : AAPFS 2792 G] [ () /APPELLANT] [ *+()/ RESPONDENT] () / FOR THE APPELLANT : , /SHRI A. K. PARAMANIK *+() / FOR THE RESPONDENT : , / SHRI S. K. KANDOI - /O R D E R [ . . . . . .. . , ] PER S.V. MEHROTRA, AM THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST ORDER OF CIT(A)- XX, KOLKATA DATED 09.09.2010. 2. AS PER OFFICE NOTE, THE APPEAL IS DELAYED BY 06 DAYS. IN THE CONDONATION PETITION, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR DELAY I N FILING THE APPEAL :- DATE REASON S 02.01.11 SUNDAY (OFFICE HOLIDAY) 03.01.11 TO 05.01.11 PROCUREMENT OF FORM-35 ALONGW ITH STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF 1 ST APPEAL. 06.01.11 & 07.01.2011 PREPARATION OF PAPERS AND PR OCESSING FOR FILING 2 ND APPEAL. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADMINISTRATIVE REASONS AS STATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE DEPARTMENT WAS PREVENTED BY REASON ABLE CAUSE FROM PREFERRING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED LIMITATION PERIOD. WE, ACCORDINGLY, CONDONE THE DELAY AND PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. [ ITA NO. 31/KOL/2011] 2 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-FI RM HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL LOSS OF RS.50,183/-. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 142 (1), ASSESSEES ACCOUNTANT FILED A LETTER WHEREIN I T WAS STATED THAT THE RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WAS ASSESSED U/S. 143(3) BY INVOKING SECTION 44AF TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS RETAILER AND REQUESTED TO ACCEPT THE RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 44AF OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE VARIOUS NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER , HE PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144 OF THE ACT. HE NOTED THAT IN THE PROFIT AND LOS S ACCOUNT, ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN PURCHASES OF RS.8,65,174/- FOR WHICH ENTIRE PAYMENT WAS OUTSTAND ING FURTHER, ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED CUSTOMS DUTY OF RS.2,40,107/-, BUT THE SAME WAS ALSO NOT VE RIFIABLE DUE TO NON-COOPERATION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THERE WERE UNSECURED L OANS OF BELOW RS.20,000/- FOR WHICH NO CONFIRMATION WAS FILED. CONSIDERING ALL THESE ASPEC TS, HE ESTIMATED THE INCOME AT RS.10.00 LAKHS U/S. 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED T HE ADDITION, INTER ALIA, OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FOUND NO DEFECTS IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAD NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL OR EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO JUSTIFY HIS E STIMATION OF RS.10.00 LAKHS. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S . 144 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-COOPERATION OF ASSESSEE AND HIS PLEA FOR ASSESSING AS PER PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 44AF WAS ALSO NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, HE HAD POINTED OUT CERTAIN ASPECTS REGARDING PURCHASES ETC. FOR WHICH WITHOUT VERIFICATION, THE ESTIMATION OF INCOM E WAS NOT POSSIBLE. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS ASPECTS TAKEN NOTE OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER WHILE ARRIVING AT THE ESTIMATE. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE CONSTRAINED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND ASSESSING OFFICER AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DENOVO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMEN T IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. - - - - . . . . / // / .# .# .# .# 0 0 0 0 1 11 1 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05. 07. 2011. SD/- SD/- [ ! , ] [ .. , ] [ MAHAVIR SINGH ] [ S.V. MEHROTRA ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 2 / DATED : 5 TH JULY, 2011. [ ITA NO. 31/KOL/2011] 3 - 3 * 4 54%6 - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. /APPELLANT- INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-36(2), 18, RA BINDRA SARANI, PODDAR COURT (3 RD FLOOR), KOLKATA-700 001. 2 *+() / RESPONDENT : M/S. SHREE SUBHAM EXPORTS, 24, HEMAN TA BASU SARANI, KOLKATA-700 001. 3. -# / CIT(E) 4. -# ( )/ CIT(A) 5. 0 * # / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [ +4 * / TRUE COPY] -#. / BY ORDER 7 / !8 /DEPUTY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR . [KKC 9: #;8 < /SR.PS]