ACIT, Circle , Patiala V. Punjab State Transmission Corporation Ltd., Patiala

ITA 363/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5999 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA
• Assessee Lawyers: K.P. BAJAJ
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., ! '# .. , $ %& BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , R.L. NEGI, JM ITA NO.363/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 THE ACIT CIRCLE, PATIALA-147001, PUNJAB PUNJAB STATE TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD. SHAKTI SADAN, OPPOSITE KALI MATA MANDIR, THE MALL, PATIALA-147001 PUNJAB PAN NO: AAFCP4714J APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. P. BAJAJ, ADVOCATE SHRI VIPEN SETHI, ADVOCATE #!' REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, ADDL. CIT $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 09/09/2021 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09/09/2021 %'/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORDER DT . 21/01/2019 OF THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL : 1. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA IS LEGALLY CORRECT IN TREATING OTHER SOURCE IN COME AS BUSINESS & PROFESSION INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS. 18,35,14,919/- 2. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA IS LEGALLY CORRECT IN ALLOWING THE CARRY FORWA RD OF LOSSES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 310,45,48,325/-. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE ISSUES WHICH ARE INVOLVED IN THIS YEAR WERE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IN ITA NOS. 1024 TO 1027/CHD/2018 FOR THE A.Y.S 2011-12 TO 2014- 15 WHICH HAD BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THIS BENCH OF THE ITAT VID E ORDER DT. 15/04/2019 AND 2 THE SIMILAR ISSUES HAD BEEN SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF T HE A.O. FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS FURNISHED WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 66 TO 71 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK. THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. DR. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIE S AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD IT IS NOTICED THAT SIMILAR ISSUES HAVING IDENTICAL FACTS WERE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IN THE PRECEDING A.YS. 2011 -12 TO 2014-15, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE FIGURES INVOLVED OTHERWISE THE FACT S ARE IDENTICAL FOR THE AFORESAID A.YS I.E; 2011-12 TO 2014-15, IN APPEALS NO. ITA NO S. 1024 TO 1027/CHD/2018 WHEREIN THE IDENTICAL ISSUES HAD BEEN ADJUDICATED AND WERE SET ASI DE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, THE RELEVANT FINDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN PARA 9 TO 15 OF THE ORDER DT. 15/04/2019 WHICH READ AS UNDER: 9. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. CIT DR SUBM ITTED THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE WAS A SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IN ITA NO. 446/CH D/1999 FOR A.Y. 1996-97 AND 520/CHD/2000 FOR A.Y. 1997-98 WHEREIN THE ISSUE HAS BEEN SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION BY FOLLOWI NG THE EARLIER ORDER DT. 04/01/2004 IN ITA NO. 412/CHD/1999 FOR A.Y. 1996-97 IN THE CASE OF PE PSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. VS. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, VIDE ORDER DT. 02/01/2004, COPY OF T HE SAID ORDER WAS FURNISHED WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD. 10. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT AFTER DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE ITAT VIDE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER DT. 02/01/2004, THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT. 28/02/2005 AND CONS IDERED ALL THE INCOME IN QUESTION EXCEPT INTEREST ON FIXED DEPOSITS UNDER THE HEAD B USINESS INCOME AND THAT THE INTEREST INCOME ON FIXED DEPOSITS WAS CONSIDERED UNDER THE H EAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS FURNISHED WHICH IS PLACE D ON RECORD. 11. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED VI DE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER DT. 22/01/2004 IN ITA NO. 446/CHD/1999 & ITA NO. 520/CHD/2000 FOR THE A.Y. 1996-97 AND 1997-98 RESPECTIVELY IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. THE RELEVANT F INDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN THE SAID ORDER AT PARA 16 WHICH READ AS UNDER: 16. KEEPING IN VIEW THE DECISION OF THE ITAT CHAND IGARH BENCH DT. 02/01/2004 (SUPRA) IN THE CASE OF PEPSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. VS. JCIT SPL . RANGE, WHERE THE IDENTICAL ISSUES WERE INVOLVED AS INVOLVED IN THE INSTANT CASES OF T HE ASSESSEE, SO THE JUDICIAL PROPRIETY DEMANDS THAT IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY IN TH E APPROACH OF THE BENCH, WE SHOULD FOLLOW OUR OWN ORDERS AND SO KEEPING IN VIEW THIS F ACT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND ACCORD INGLY REJECT THE SAME. HENCE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER DT. 02/01/2004 (SU PRA) PASSED BY THE ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF PEPSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. VS. JCIT SPL. RANGE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW AND REST ORE BACK THE ENTIRE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PASSING A DENOVO ASSESSME NT ORDER IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ITAT CHANDIGARH, THE RELEVANT P ORTION OF WHICH WE HAVE REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE IN THIS ORDER. 3 ACCORDINGLY, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAI D ORDER DATED 22.01.2014, THIS ISSUE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE AD JUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE DIRECTION GIVEN IN AFORESAID REFER TO ORDER DT. 22/01/2004. 12. VIDE GROUND NO. 2 THE GRIEVANCE OF THE DEPARTME NT RELATES TO THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO ALLOW THE CARRY FORWARD LOSSES. 13. THE LD. CIT DR AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT T HE FACTS RELATING TO THIS ISSUE ARE NOT CLEAR, THEREFORE, THIS ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER CONSIDERING THE PROPORTIO NATE TRANSFER OF ASSETS FROM THE ERSTWHILE COMPANY TO THE SUCCESSOR COMPANY I.E; ASS ESSEE. 14. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT OBJECT, IF THIS ISSUE IS TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION AND TO BE DECIDED IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE CARRY FORWARD OF LOSSES, IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. 15. IN OTHER APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT, IDENTICAL I SSUES ARE RAISED THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE AMOUNT INVOLVED THEREFORE OUR FINDINGS GIVEN IN RESPECT OF A.Y. 2012- 13 SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12, 2013-14 AND 2014-15. SO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID ORDER DT. 15/ 04/2019 IN ITA NOS. 1024 TO 1027/CHD/2018 FOR THE A.YS 2011-12 TO 2014-15 IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, THESE TWO ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE O F THE A.O. TO BE DECIDED AS HAS BEEN DIRECTED IN THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER DT. 1 5/04/2019. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09/09/2021 ) SD/- SD/- .. .., (R.L. NEGI ) ( N.K. SAIN I) $ %&/ JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 09/09/2021 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE