SHARDA RAJASHEKAR PROP. M/S. SHARDA CATERERS, MUMBAI V. ACIT 23(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3624/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0945 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S PADMAJA
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN
• Keywords: Presumptive income; Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 44AD; 234B

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A MUMBAI . . , , , BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJENDRA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99) ITA NO.3625/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1999-00) ITA NO.3626/MUM/2008(A.Y. 2000-01) ITA NO.3627/MUM/2008(A.Y. 2001-02) ITA NO.3628/MUM/2008(A.Y. 2002-03) ITA NO.3629/MUM/2008(A.Y. 2003-04) ITA NO.3630/MUM/2008(A.Y. 2004-05) MRS. SHARADA RAJASHEKAR PROP. M/S. SHARDA CATERERS, 4/4, SADAN WADI, CHS LAKE ROAD, LBS MARG, BHANDUP(W), MUMBAI 400 078 PAN:AAAPI 5960M (APPELLANT ) VS. THE ADDL. CIT 23(1), C-10, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI 400051 (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M. SUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT BY : MS. S. PADM AJA DATE OF HEARING 30/03/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08/04/2015 ORDER PER I.P.BANSAL, J.M: ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND PE RTAIN TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 TO 2004-05AND THESE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AG AINST A CONSOLIDATED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)XXIII, MUMBAI DATED 11/3/2008. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN EACH OF THE APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 2 GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.8,460/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,780/- AS 'UNDISCLOSED SOURCES'. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.24,124/- AS 'UNDISCLOSED INTEREST INCOME'. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,238/- AS SA TAX PAYMENT 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 9. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3625/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 3 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.9,160/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,246/- AS SA TAX PAYMENT 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,000/- AS 'UNDISCLOSED SOURCES'. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 9. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3626/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,960/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 4 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,238/- AS SA TAX PAYMENT 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 20,000/- AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 9. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3627/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.22,500/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 5 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3628/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.24,200/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 815/- AS OUT OF SELF ASSESSMENT TAX 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 67,403/- AS OUT OF LTCG. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 9. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3629/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 6 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.14,100/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 26,750/- AS UNEXPLAINED ADDITION TO CAPITAL ACCOUNT. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.3630/MUM/2008: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U1S.143(3) R.W.S 153C OF TH E I T ACT, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN ISSUING DIRECTION U1S. 142(2A) OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS.8,500/- AS 'OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES'. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 3,800/- AS INTEREST INCOME. ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 7 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234A IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234B IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 234C IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING IT WAS BROUGHT TO O UR NOTICE THAT IN GROUP CASES SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE AND THE APPEALS FILED BY THE O THER ASSESSES OF THIS GROUP WERE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE ON ALL THE ISSUES. REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE ORDER DATED 29/6/2011 PASSED IN THE CAS ES OF MS. MEENAKSHI R. SUNDARAM VS. ITO, ITA NO.3196 TO 3202/M/2008, MR. A .S. RAJASHEKHAR VS. ITO 3641& 3642/MUM/2008, & MR. A.S. RAJESHEKHAR ITA 36 36 TO 3640/MUM/2008 VS. ITO. 2.1 IN THE SAID ORDER ADDRESSING TO THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING VALIDITY OR OTHERWISE OF ASSESSMENT AND ALSO ON ME RITS GROUNDS WERE DECIDED AND CONSIDERED AND APPEALS WERE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF AS SESSEE. THE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS PLACED ON OUR RECORD AND WAS ALSO GIVEN T O LD.DR. REFERENCE WAS ALSO MADE TO THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE WHICH APPEALS WERE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IX) APPLYING THESE PRINCIPLES TO THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ORDERING SPECIAL AUDIT UNDER SECTION 142(2A). FURTH ER, A SMALL TIME OUT- DOOR CATERER HAS BEEN SEARCH AND AS ALREADY STATED, THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THERE IS A COMPLEX ITY IN THE ACCOUNTS WITHOUT FIRST ATTEMPTING TO EXAMINE WAS NOT AT ALL JUSTIFIE D. THE FEES PAID TO SPECIAL ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 8 AUDIT I.E. RS.6,50,000/- WAS EXORBITANT WITH REFERE NCE TO THE NATURE OF THE CASE. IN THIS FINANCIAL CAPITAL OF THE COUNTRY, WE ARE SURPRISED THAT SUCH A SMALL OUTDOOR CATERER AND MARRIAGE PARTY LABOUR CON TRACTOR HAVING NOT MUCH MARGIN, WAS SEARCHED AND THE ACCOUNTS HAVE BEE N ORDERED FOR SPECIAL AUDIT AT THE FAG END OF THE TIME BARRING PERIOD WIT HOUT EVEN EXAMINING THE ACCOUNTS AND TAX AUDIT FEE OF ABOUT ` 6,50,000 WA S DIRECTED TO BE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE TAX AUDIT FIRM. ULTIMATELY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETES THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING CERTAIN AD-HOC D ISALLOWANCE ON PERCENTAGE BASIS, ON THE GROUND THAT THE VOUCHERS A RE SELF-MADE VOUCHERS AND THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE IN CASH. WE EXPRESS OUR D ISAPPOINTMENT AND ANGUISH ON SUCH ASPECTS. IN THE CASE OF LABOUR CONT RACTORS, THE ACT ITSELF PROVIDES PRESUMPTIVE TAXATION UNDER SECTION 44AD @ 8% AND UNDER SECTION 44AF @ 5% IN THE CASE OF RETAIL BUSINESS. THE ASSES SING OFFICER WAS NOT AT ALL JUSTIFIED IN ORDERING SPECIAL AUDIT AND ALSO IN IMPOSING SUCH HUGE FEE ON THE ASSESSEE. AS WE HAVE HELD THAT THE TAX AUDIT IT SELF IS BAD-IN-LAW, THE ASSESSMENT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN COMPLETED ON OR BEFOR E 31ST MARCH 2006 AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOES NOT SET THE BENEFIT OF E XPLANATION (II) TO SEC. 158B(1). AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 29TH SE PTEMBER, 2006, WE HOLD THAT THE SAME IS BARRED BY LIMITATION. X) EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS TIME BARRED AND AS WE HAVE HEARD THE MATTER ON MERITS, WE FIND THAT THE ENTIRE ADDITIONS ARE NOTHING BUT AD-H OC DISALLOWANCE ON THE GROUND THAT THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE IN CASH AND ON TH E GROUND THAT SELF- MADE VOUCHERS ARE PRODUCED. KEEPING THESE IN VIEW, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE ESTIMATED THE PROFIT, TAKING GUIDANCE FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 44AD OR 44 AF. AS THE PROFITS DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERCENTAGE & INDICATED IN THESE TWO SECTIONS, THE DISALLOWANCE CANNOT BE S USTAINED. CONSEQUENTLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEAL S) IN ALL THE YEARS UNDER ASSESSMENT AND ALLOW ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THE APPEALS. XI) INSOFAR AS ON THE LEVY OF INTEREST UND ER SECTION 234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT, IS CONCERNED, THIS IS MANDATORY AN D CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE ADJUDICATION IS NEED ED. 11. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEALS IN ITA NO.36 36 TO 3640 & 3643/ MUM./2008, ARE ALLOWED. 2.2 IT WAS FURTHER BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE FACTS OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CASE DECIDED BY THE TR IBUNAL ARE IDENTICAL. THUS, IT ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 9 WAS SUBMITTED THAT APPLYING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECI SION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN GROUP CASE THE MATTER SHOULD BE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT T HE AFOREMENTIONED SUBMISSIONS OF LD. AR AND RELIED UPON THE ORDER PAS SED BY AO AND LD. CIT(A). 4. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF CO-ORDINAT E BENCH RENDERED IN THE GROUP CASE, WE HOLD THAT SINCE THE ASSESSMENT WAS N OT COMPLETED WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME WHICH WAS 31/3/2006 AND THE ASSE SSMENTS WERE COMPLETED ON 27/9/06. THUS, THE ASSESSMENTS ARE BARRED BY LIMIT ED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF TRIBUNAL WE ALSO HOLD TH AT AO WAS NOT AT ALL JUSTIFIED IN ORDERING SPECIAL AUDIT AND ALSO IMPOSING SUCH H UGE FEE ON THE ASSESSEE AND TAX AUDIT ITSELF IS BAD IN LAW. ON MERITS ALSO, RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION WE HOLD THAT ADDITIONS WERE NOT JUSTIFIED. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/04/2015 08/4/2015 SD/- SD/- ( , /RAJENDRA ) ( . . / I.P. BANSAL ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; $% DATED 08/04/2015 ITA NO.3624/MUM/2008(A.Y. 1998-99& OTHERS 10 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. & '( / THE APPELLANT 2. )*'( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. +, ( & ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. +, / CIT 5. -. ),%/0 , &1 &/0 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 2 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, * -, ), //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI . % . ./ VM , SR. PS