Ram Prakash Senapati, Puri V. ITO, Puri

ITA 340/CTK/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4207 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUVENDU DUTTA
• Assessee Lawyers: B R PANDA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 340/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 SRI RAM PRAKASH SENAPATI, SENAPATI BHAVAN, GRAND ROAD, PURI VS. ITO, PURI WARD, PURI PAN/GIR NO. AOLPS 5502 C (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.R.PANDA REVENUE BY : SHRI SUVENDU DUTTA , DR DATE OF HEARING : 23 /11 / 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 /11 / 2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 2, BHUBAENSWAR DATED 14.4.2015 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. FOR THAT THE ORDERS OF THE FORUMS BELOW ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG , EXCESSIVE AND ILLEGAL IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASES THUS ARE LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND DELETED SINCE IT HAD BEEN IMPOSED IN MOST CONFUSED STATE OF MIND BY THE LOWER FORUMS . 2. FOR THAT THE APPELLANT ALTHOUGH HAD EXPLAINED AND SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED 2 ITA NO. 340/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF THE AMOUNT RS.27,14,609/ - AND ANOTHER TRANSACTION DETECTED AT THIS STAGE AMOUNTING TO RS.6,05,780/ - BEING THE AMOUNT DETECTED FROM BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT AND FROM THE ACCOUNTS OF PREM PRAKASH SENAPATI, ACCORDINGL Y, THE ORDERS PASSED ARE TO BE QUASHED AND VACATED ONCE FOUND THAT ESTIMATION OF ACCOUNT IS MADE ADOPTING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AF OF THE I.T.ACT'61 AND THERE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PIECEMEAL ADDITION IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENTS. 3. FOR THAT THE BANK TRANSACTIONS FOUND IN THE NAME OF MR. PREM PRAKASH SENAPATI IN THE AXIS BANK ON ACCOUNT OF HIS CEMENT BUSINESS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONNECTED AND ADDED WITH THE APPELLANT'S BUSINESS AS WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT TYPE OF TRANSACTIONS MADE. THE RETURNED INCOME S HOWN AT RS.2,02,310/ - SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY DELETING THE INFLATION AND ADDITIONS MADE IN INFLATING THE ADDITION OF RS.27,14,906/ - . 4. FOR THAT THE ORDERS HAVE BEEN PASSED IN CONFUSED MANNER AND IN CRYPTIC WAY WITHOUT AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY FOR ASCERTAINING THE FACTS AND TO FIND OUT THE CLARITY IN THE MATTER WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVELY PROVED REGARDING THE APPELLANT'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE BUSINESS OF HIS BROTHER AND IN A CONTRADICTING MANNER SINCE THE ORDERS HAVE BEEN PASSED BY THE FORUMS BELOW ARE L IABLE TO BE QUASHED AND DELETED. 5. FOR THAT THE ORDERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED IN ESTIMATED MANNER IN NO ACCOUNTS CASE AND NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR UNDER THE LAW AND BANK PASS BOOK IS NOT THE ACCOUNT TO BE RELIED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND FILED A PETITION DATED 23.11.2016 FOR THE SAME, WHEREIN, IN PARA 2, IT IS STATED AS UNDER: 2. THAT IN GIVING THE APPEAL EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE LD. C.I.T.(A) ONCE AGAIN THE A.O. CALLED FOR THE RECORDS FOR VERIFICATION AND ACCORDING TO THAT THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT PRODUCED THE DETAILS AND THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER VERIFYING THE MATTER AFRESH A MODIFICATION ORDER PASSED ON 18.04.2016 WHEREIN THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED A S MADE IN THE EARLIER 3 ITA NO. 340/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT DTD. 29,12.2011. SO IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE MODIFICATIO N ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED MAY BE TREATED AS INFRUCTUOUS AND WITHDRAWN ACCORDINGLY. 4. LD D.R. HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. HENCE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED AS WITHDRAWN. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 / 11 / 2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 23 /11 /2016 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : SRI RAM PRAKASH SENAPATI, SENAPATI BHAVAN, GRAND ROAD, PURI 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, PURI WARD, PURI 3. THE CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR 4. CIT , BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//