The ITO, Ward-3, Vapi V. Smt. Yasmin Badruddin Halani, Vapi

ITA 3422/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2267 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 19-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRIS R MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS URVASHI SHODHAN

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,SURAT BENCH,SURAT , , BEFORE SHRI C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . / ITA NO.3422/AHD/2014/SRT [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, VAPI. VS. SMT. YASMIN BADRUDDIN HALANI, B-302, NEW BUILDING, BANI FATIMI CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY, KABRASTAN ROAD, VAPI 396 195. [PAN:ABEPH 4850 J] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / ASSESSEE BY : MRS. URVASHI SHODHAN, ADVOCATE /REVENUE BY : SHRIS.R. MEENA, SR. D.R /DATE OF HEARING : 07-08-2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09-08-2018 / ORDER PERC.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THISAPPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THEORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 15.10.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y) 2007-08. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS FOLLOWS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 76,80,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED REMUNERATION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), VALSAD OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 ITA NO.3422/AHD/2014/SRT (A.Y: 2007-08) SMT. YASMIN BADRUDDIN HALANI 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED ON THE RECORD OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 76,80,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED REMUNERATION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LOOKING INTO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), VALSAD OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT ANY BASIS THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE BY RESTORING THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO). 4. REPLYING TO THE ABOVE, THE LD. ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE (AR) SUBMITTED THAT THE AO MADE ADDITION BY TAKING A HYPER TECHNICAL APPROACH AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE RELEVANT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS CORRECT AND SUSTAINABLE. HE ALSO TOOK US THROUGH THE RELEVANT OPERATIVE PARA 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ONLY FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF HIS PREDECESSOR IN THE CASE OF SHRI HABIB H. HILANI DATED 31.03.2012, WHO WAS ALSO A PARTNER ALONG WITH PRESENT ASSESSEE IN THE FIRM M/S. BHOOMI TRACTOR SALES & SERVICES DURING AY 2006-07 AND 2007-08. 3 ITA NO.3422/AHD/2014/SRT (A.Y: 2007-08) SMT. YASMIN BADRUDDIN HALANI 5. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, FROM RELEVANT PARA 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE OBSERVE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF HIS PREDECESSOR IN THE CASE OF SHRI HABIB H. HILANI, (WHO WAS ALSO A PARTNER WITH THE ASSESSEE IN THE FIRM M/S. BHOOMI TRACTOR DURING AY 2006-07 & 2007-08), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF PARTNER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF AVOIDING DUPLICATION THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED. FROM THE RELEVANT PART OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF SHRI HABIB H. HILANI AS REPRODUCED IN PARA 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS WERE MADE IN THE HANDS OF FIRM M/S. BHOOMI TRACTORS AND THEREFORE, TO AVOID DOUBLE TAXATION THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE HANDS OF PARTNERS ON PROTECTIVE BASIS WERE DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. WE ARE UNABLE TO SEE ANY VALID REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THUS, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT,THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF09 TH AUGUST, 2018. / SURAT ; DATED : 09AUGUST, 2018 EDN SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( O.P.MEENA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (C.M.GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER 4 ITA NO.3422/AHD/2014/SRT (A.Y: 2007-08) SMT. YASMIN BADRUDDIN HALANI / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT ; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A, VALSAD; 4. PRL. CIT, SURAT; 5. , , / DR, ITAT, SURAT; 6. / GUARD FILE .