ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Vatika Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4057/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 65573 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 30-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M M MR RR RS SUSHMA SING
• Assessee Lawyers: M
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

ITA NOS. 4028-4049 & 4053-4054 & 4057/DEL/2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 4028 TO 4049//DEL/2012 A.YRS. : 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, LAKSHMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI (APPELLANTS) M/S UNITECH WIRELESS (TAMIL NADU) PVT. LTD., THE MASTRPIECE BUILDING, SECTOR-54, GOLF COURSE ROAD, GURGAON, HARYANA (PAN/GIR NO. : AAGCA4923K) (RESPONDENTS) DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: MR RR RS. SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) S. SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) S. SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) S. SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) ASSESSEE BY : SH. TAPAS RAM MISHRA, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SH. TAPAS RAM MISHRA, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SH. TAPAS RAM MISHRA, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SH. TAPAS RAM MISHRA, ADV. I.T.A. NOS. 4053 & 4054/DEL/2012 A.YRS. 2010-2011 & 2011-12 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, LAKSHMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI VS. M/S TURKISH AIRLINES, THAPAR HOUSE, FIRST FLOOR, 124, JANPATH, NEW DELHI -110001 (PAN : AABCT9438K) DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: MR RR RS. S. S. S. SHUMANA SEN, SR. D.R. SHUMANA SEN, SR. D.R. SHUMANA SEN, SR. D.R. SHUMANA SEN, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : ASSESSEE BY : ASSESSEE BY : ASSESSEE BY : NONE NONE NONE NONE I.T.A. NO. 4057/DEL/2012 A.Y. 2010-2011 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, LAKSHMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI VS. M/S VATIKA LTD., 621-A, DEVIKA TOWER, 6, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI (PAN: AABCV5647G) ( (( ( APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT S SS S ) )) ) (RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT S SS S ) )) ) DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: M DEPARTMENT BY: MR RR RS. S. S. S. SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) SUSHMA SINGH, C.I.T.(D.R.) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASSESSEE BY : SH. SHAILESH GUPTA, ADV. SHAILESH GUPTA, ADV. SHAILESH GUPTA, ADV. SHAILESH GUPTA, ADV. ITA NOS. 4028-4049 & 4053-4054 & 4057/DEL/2012 2 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH THIS BUNCH OF 25 APPEALS IS BY THE REVENUE, CHALLE NGING SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS PERVERSE AND ERRONEOUS ON FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE DEPARTMENT HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 4 GROUNDS IN THESE APPEALS TO CHALLENGE THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (A) IN HOLDING THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER U/S. 200A OF THE ACT WAS NOT APPEALABLE U/S. 246A AND ON THE OTHER HAND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKES IN THE ORDER WITHIN TWO MONTHS. DURING TH E HEARING, IN SOME CASES, AS MENTIONED IN CAPTION OF APPEALS, NONE AP PEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE ISSUES ARE INVOLVED FOR ADJU DICATION IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS COMMON, THEREFORE, THESE APPEALS WERE HEA RD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE S AKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE S, WHO ADVANCED THEIR ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUNDS RAISED BY SUBMITTING THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ERRED IN GRANTING DIRECTIONS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND F URTHER ERRED IN FIXING ITA NOS. 4028-4049 & 4053-4054 & 4057/DEL/2012 3 TIME LIMIT OF TWO MONTHS FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEE AS APPLICABLE TO THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS, DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY SUBMITTING THAT EVEN IF THE APPEAL IS NOT FILED, STILL THERE I S NO GRIEVANCE TO THE REVENUE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BEFORE COMING TO A COMMON CONC LUSION, WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE RELEVANT PORTION FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER:- THE ABOVE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE APPELLANTS U/S . 200A OF THE I.T. ACT IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12 AGAINST THE COMPUTERIZED PROCESSING ORDER OF AO (TDS) WHERE TAX AND INTEREST U/S. 200A HAVE BEEN COMPUTED IN THE COMPUTER FOR SHORT DEDUCTION / SHORT PAYMENT/ LATE PAYMENT BY THE APPELLANT. THERE IS NO APPEAL PROVISION U/S. 246A OF THE I.T. ACT FOR FIL ING APPEALS AGAINST ORDER U/S. 200A OF THE I.T. ACT. THE APPELLANTS ARE ADVISED TO FILE NECESSARY CORRECTION S STATEMENTS BEFORE THE AO (TDS), COORDINATE AND COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND RECTIFY THE ORDER U/S. 200A/154 OF THE I.T. ACT WITH THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AND AFTER RECTIFICATION, PAY THE TAX AND I NTEREST IF ANY, AFTER RECTIFICATION. THE AO (TDS) SHOULD GIVE APPEAL EFFECT TO THESE ORDERS WITHIN 2 MONTHS OF ITA NOS. 4028-4049 & 4053-4054 & 4057/DEL/2012 4 RECEIPT OF THE ORDER IMMEDIATELY BY ISSUING NECESSAR Y NOTICES U/S. 154 OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT AND RECTIFYING THE ORDERS AS PER LAW. IF THE RECTIFICA TION IS NOT POSSIBLE IN COMPUTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHO ULD MANUALLY RECTIFY BY PASSING SUITABLE ORDER IN A FOR MAT SO THAT A MASS RECTIFICATION CAN BE COMPLETED QUICK LY. THE AO (TDS) SHOULD GIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT BEFORE RECTIFYING THESE ORDERS AND LISTENING TO THE GRIEVANCES OF THE APPELLANT. 6. IF THE OBSERVATION MADE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS A RE ANALYZED, THERE IS DIRECTION/ ADVICE BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (A) TO FILE CORRECT STATEMENT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER(TDS), AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASS ESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT TH E REVENUE SHOULD NOT FEEL AGGRIEVED, AS THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE IS TO D O JUSTICE. EVEN OTHERWISE, NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AND THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) HAS MERELY REMANDED TH E ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER, THE SAME IS UPHELD. HOW EVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO T HE RESPECTIVE ASSESSES. THE ASSESSES ARE AT FURTHER LIBERTY F URNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIM. SINCE THE ASSESSES H AVE BEEN GRANTED ITA NOS. 4028-4049 & 4053-4054 & 4057/DEL/2012 5 FAIR OPPORTUNITY, THEREFORE, THE TIME LIMIT OF COMPL ETION WITHIN TWO MONTHS, AS DIRECTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (A), IS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIR ECTED TO COMPLETE WITHIN REASONABLE TIME/AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 7. FINALLY, SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE RIDER, ALL THE APPE ALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AT THE CON CLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 01.10.2012. SD/- SD/- [ [[ [U.B.S. BEDI U.B.S. BEDI U.B.S. BEDI U.B.S. BEDI] ]] ] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 01/10/2012 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES