KALPANA VIJAY DOSHI, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 3817/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4438 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: KSHIPRA SANGHVI; H M SANGHVI
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND AMARJIT SINGH, JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 3 817 / MUM/ 201 2 ( / ASSESSMENT YEA R : 20 0 2 - 03 ) SMT.KALPANA VIJAY DOSHI, GORAI LINK ROAD, BORIVALI - ( W ) , MUMBAI - 400091 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 15(3)(2), 1 ST FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR, GRANT ROAD, MUMBAI . ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ ./PAN. : AHVPD1314L / APPELLANT BY MS. KSHIPRA SANGHVI AND SHRI H M SANGHVI / RESPONDENT BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR / DATE OF HEARING : 6.1. 201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6.1.20 16 / O R D E R P ER B R BASKARAN, AM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 07 - 3 - 2012 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - 26, MUMBAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002 - 03, WHEREIN THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DECIDED THE FOLLOWING ISSUE S AGAINST THE ASSESSEE: - ( A ) VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT ( B ) ADDITION OF RS.34,498/ - RELATING TO EXPENSES ( C ) ADDITION OF RS.11,49,293/ - MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT ( D ) ADDITION OF RS.7,45,603/ - MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT. 2. THE LD A.R ADVANCED HER ARGUMENTS ON THE VAL IDITY OF RE - OPENING OF ASSESSMENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITA NO .3817 /MUM/201 2 2 HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 29 - 03 - 2004, I.E., WITHIN THE PERIOD PRESCRIBED U/S 139(4) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER THE LD CIT(A) HAS OBSERV ED THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 31.7.2004, I.E., BEYOND THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED U/S 139(4) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY HELD THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS NOT A VALID RETURN. ACCORDINGLY HE HELD THAT THE SAID INVALID RETURN DOES NOT HAVE ANY IMPL ICATION ON THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AND HENCE THE REOPENING WAS VALID. 3. THUS, WE NOTICE THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS RENDERED HIS DECISION IN INCORRECT APPRECIATION OF FACTS, WHICH VITIATES HIS ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ALL THE ISSUES URGED BEFORE US REQUIRE RE - ADJUDICATION AT HIS END. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE HIS ORDER AND RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH EXAMINATION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 6 TH JAN 201 6 . 6 TH JAN 201 6 SD SD ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 6 TH JAN 201 6 . . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI