D.C.I.T.-4(1), Agra V. Sh. Rohit Bansal, Agra

ITA 382/AGR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 38220314 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH NARAIN; S N BANSAL
• Section: 147; 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.382/AGR/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VS. SHRI ROHI T BANSAL, CIRCLE 4(1), AGRA C/O. M/S SAHITYA BHAWAN PUBLICATIONS HOSPITAL ROAD, AGRA. (PAN: AARPB 3049 H). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A. K. SHARMA, JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRAKASH NARAIN & SHRI S.N. BANSAL, ADVOCATES DATE OF HEARING : 12.10.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.10.2011 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. : THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST TH E IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.06.2010 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II, AGRA ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA HAS ERRED IN L AW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF ` 21 LACS ALONG WITH THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF ` 9,09,100/- IGNORING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS TAKE N ENTRIES OF LOAN BY ROTATING HIS UNEXPLAINED CASH. ITA NO.382/AGR/2010 A.Y. 2002-03 2 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LA W AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF I.T. ACT IG NORING THE FACT THAT THE ALLEGED CREDITORS HAVE NO CAPACITY TO PAY THE L OANS AS REVEALED FROM THE TRANSACTIONS. THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THESE CREDITORS SHOWS THAT BEFORE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE OF LOAN TO THE ASSES SEE, EQUAL AMOUNT HAD BEEN FOUND DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF CRE DITORS. 3. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LA W AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED IN THIS C ASE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 151(1) OF I.T. ACT. THE PROVISIONS OF SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 151 ARE NOT ATTRACTED IN THIS CASE AS THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT. 4. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LA W AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF ` 21 LAKH IGNORING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT REBUTTI NG THE COURTS JUDGEMENTS CITED IN THE ORDER TO JUSTIFY THE ACTION U/S 147 OF I.T. ACT, 1961. 5. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, AGRA HAS WRONGLY HEL D THAT THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS MECHANICA LLY ACCORDED THE PERMISSION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S 148 O F I.T. ACT. THE APPROVAL WAS ACCORDED AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS A VAILABLE ON RECORD AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STOCK EXCHANGE VS. ASSTT. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 906 , 911. THE APPROVAL CAN NOT BE TREATED AS MECHANICAL. 6. THAT THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) BEING ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS DESERVES TO BE QUASHED AND THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE RESTORED. 7. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR ALTER ANY OR MORE GROUND OR GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS MAY BE DEEMED FIT AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE NOT DIS PUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NO NEED TO REPEAT THE SAME FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.382/AGR/2010 A.Y. 2002-03 3 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE BY THIS BENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 31 ST MARCH, 2011 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2001-02 IN ITA NO.430/AGR/2009 AND VIDE ORDER DATED 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2008 IN THE CASE OF M/S AGRA CHEMICALS VS. ACIT-2, AGRA IN ITA NO.134/AGR/2006 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. HE STATED THAT KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE SAID DECISIONS OF THIS BENCH, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ELEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY, THE ORDERS PASSED BY THIS BENC H IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.430/AGR/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S AGRA CHEMICALS VS. ACIT-2, AGRA IN ITA NO.134/AGR/2006 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED AND DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSES SEE BY THIS BENCH, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID ORDERS, WE DIS MISS THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. ITA NO.382/AGR/2010 A.Y. 2002-03 4 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.10.2011). SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 12 TH OCTOBER, 2011 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT CONCERNED/CIT(APPEALS) CO NCERNED/D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA/GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY