Shri Sagar Kumar Ray, Bhubaneswar V. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

ITA 408/CTK/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7585 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 05-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PIYUSH KOLHE
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ PATRA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Search and seizure; Document seized; Documents seized; Set aside
• Section: 153A; 250; 13; 32; 68; 132; 15

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM ( ) ./ IT(SS)A NO. 47 /CTK/201 6 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008 - 2009) SAGAR K UMAR RAY, PLOT NO.MIG - 19, STAGE - II, LAXMI SAGAR, BHUBANESWAR - 6 VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, BHUBANESWAR ./ PAN NO. : A ERPR 7039 D AND . / ITA NO. 408 /CTK/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 13 - 20 14 ) SAGAR KUMAR RAY, PLOT NO.MIG - 19, STAGE - II, LAXMI SAGAR, BHUBANESWAR - 6 VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, BHUBANESWAR ./ PAN NO. : AERPR 7039 D ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANOJ PATRA , FCA /REVEN UE BY : SHRI PIYUSH KOLHE , CITDR / DATE OF HEARING : 18 / 12 /2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 / 01 /20 20 / O R D E R PER L.P.SAHU, AM : THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE , ONE IS AGAI NST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 3 , BHUBANESWAR, DATED 26.08.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 08 - 20 09 AND OTHER IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.07.2018, PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 2014 . IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 2 2. FIRST WE SHALL DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN IT(SS)A NO. 47/CTK/2016, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. (I)(A) ADDITION OF RS. 9,66,112/ - ON THE GROUND OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S. 68 IN RESPECT OF PROPRIETOR'S CAPITAL WERE NOT GENUINE IS INCORRECT AND BAD IN LAW AS THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT IS DISCLOSED IN THE SCHEDULE OF BALANCE SHEET WHICH IS INCLUSIVE OF CURRENT YEAR PROFIT AND DRAWINGS OF THE APPELLANT. (II) FURTHER, THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,56,820/ - ON THE GROUND OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S. 68 IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS OUTSTANDING IN THE BOOKS OF THE APPELLANT IS INCORRECT AND ARBITRARY AS THE DETAILS OF CREDITORS ALONG WITH THEIR ADDRESS, LEDGER COPY AND BALANCE CONFIRMATION WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT AND HENCE GENUINE. 2 . DISALLOWING RENT, EMPL OYEES EXPENSES, CONVEYANCE AND TELEPHONE EXPENSES BY 30% ON ESTIMATED BASIS ON THE GROUND THE EXPENSES BEING BOGUS IS INCORRECT AND BAD IN LAW AS THESE ARE PURELY INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND HENCE GENUINE. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE T O ADD OR TO AMEND THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 4. FOR THESE AND AMONG OTHER GROUNDS TO BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, ADEQUATE RELIEF AS MAY BE DEEMED FIT BE GRANTED IN THE MATTER. 3. FURTHER THE ASSESS EE VIDE LETTER DATED 25.07.2019 HAS FILED ADDITIONAL GROUND WHICH READS AS UNDER : - 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT (APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ASSESSMENTS U/S. 153A OF THE ACT IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT NO INCREMENTING DOCUMENTS WHATSOEVER WAS FOUND/ SEIZED DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION U/S. 132 OF THE ACT WHICH IS SINE QUA NON FOR MAKING THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 153A OF THE ACT. 4 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTOR OF ORI SONS GROUP OF COMPANIES, WHO WAS RUNNING BUSINESS OF COMPUTER SALES AND SERVICES THROUGH HIS PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN M/S.S.S. IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 3 INFORMATICS. A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED U/S.132 OF I.T. ACT, 1961 IN THE OFFICE PREMISES AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF ORISONS GROUP OF C OMPANIES ON 11.04.2012. THE ASSESSEE BEING ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL ASSESSES OF THE GROUP, SEARCH &. SEIZURE OPERATION WAS ALSO CONDUCTED IN HIS RESIDENTIAL PREMISES. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. ISSUED NOTICE U/S.153A OF THE ACT ON 12.06.2014. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSES SEE FILED THE RETURN ON 02.02.2015 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.4,05,993/ - . AFTER FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME, THE A.O. ISSUED NOTICE U/S.143(2)/142(1) OF THE ACT. WHEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICES AND NO REPLY OR DOCUMENT WAS FILED AGAINST THE QUERIES RAISED, THE A.O. ISSUED SHOW CAUSE ON 09.03.2015 INTIMATING HIS INTENTION TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U / S .144/153A OF THE ACT, BUT THIS TIME ALSO, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR OR FILED ANY REPLY. THEREFORE, THE A.O. COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 15 3A/144 OF THE ACT ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.25,87,400/ - MAKING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, BOGUS EXPENDITURE AND DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI - A, RESPECTIVELY. 5 . FEELING AGGRIEVED FROM THE ORDER OF AO, THE ASSESSEE APPEALED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO EXCEPT THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI - A . 6 . FEELING FURTHER AGGRIEVED FROM CIT(A)S ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELL ATE TRIBUNAL. IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 4 7. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR, BEFORE US ARGUED ONLY ON THE LEGAL ISSUE RAISED IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND AND SUBMITTED THAT NO INCREMENTING DOCUMENTS WHATSOEVER WAS FOUND/ SEIZED DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION U/S. 132 OF THE ACT WHICH IS SINE QUA N ON FOR MAKING THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 153A OF THE ACT . THEREFORE, LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LEGAL ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ADJUDICATED. 8. LD A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FRAMED ASSESSMENT U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT AND MAD E ADDITIONS IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIALS AND, THEREFORE, IMPUGNED ORDER OF A SSESSMENT PASSED U/S.144/153A A OF THE ACT ARE WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY OF LAW. FURTHER, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN THE PANCHANAMA, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND AND SEIZED FOR THE PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION . IT WAS ALSO THE CONTENTION OF LD. AR THAT THE CIT(A) IN PARA (IV)(A), PAGE NO.7 & 8 OF ITS ORDER HAS ALSO MENTIONED THE FACT THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL RELATIN G TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR THAT RETURN WAS FILED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT ON 05.11.2008, WHICH IS WELL WITHIN THE TIME AND THE SAME WAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY TH E DEPARTMENT. HOWEVER, THE DUE DATE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S.143(2) IS 30.09.20 09 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. A.Y.200 8 - 20 09 . THE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 11.04.2012. LD. AR FURTHER IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 5 SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN MADE ON 31.03.2015, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO WAS ABATED IN PURSUANCE TO THE SEARCH. ACCORDINGLY , LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT I N ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THE A SSESSMENT CO MPLETED U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT, BEING NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYE S OF LAW ARE DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTIONS, LD. AR RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING DECISION S : - I) CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA, 380 ITR 573 (DEL) II) DR. SUKANTA CHANDRA MALLICK & O RS., I.T.(SS) A NOS.86 - 91/CTK/2018, ORDER DATED 08.07.2019. II I) ORISON MINERALS & PROPERTIES, IT(SS)A NOS.31 TO 34/CTK/2017, ORDER DATED 17.05.2018; AND IV ) MIDAS CAPITAL PVT. LTD., IT(SS)A NOS.04&05/CTK/2018, ORDER DATED 23.03.2018. 9. ON THE OTHER HAND , LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION AT THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS, BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ETC. WERE FOUND AND SEIZED, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE AO HAS RIGHTLY PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE ADDITIONS. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED BY LD. DR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT BOTHER TO RESPOND THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S.153A(1)(A) OF THE ACT BY THE AO, EVEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE, THE AO HAS LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER TO THE BEST OF JUDGMENT U/S.144 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT IN NO WAY THE ASSESSEE IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 6 DESERVES ANY RELIEF AND PRAYED FOR DISMISSAL OF ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE BY UPHOLDING THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO. 10. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSING THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, A SHORT QUESTION BEFORE US TO DECIDE AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS JUSTIFIED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144/ 153A OF THE ACT BY MAKING IMPUGNED ADDITION S FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL DEEMED FOUND DURING THE SEARCH CONDUCTED U/S.1 32 OF THE ACT. LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE PANCHANAMA FILED ALONG WITH THE ADDITIONAL GROUND, COP IES OF WHICH ARE PLACED ON RECORD AND SUBMITTED THAT NO SUCH INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO ENABLE THE AO TO INVOKE THE PR OVISIONS OF SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PANCHANAMA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE SEIZURE DOCUMENTS MARKED AS SR - 1 TO SR - 5 , COPIES OF WHICH ARE PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 1 TO 350 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME, WE FOUND THAT THOSE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE NOT RELEVANT TO CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. O N PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MENTION BY THE AO THAT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE FO R THE PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. EVEN THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO MENTIONED IN ITS APPELLATE ORDER THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS AND VOUCHERS OF THE PROPRIETORSHIPS IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 7 CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE OR OTHER CONCERNS OF THE ORISSONS GROUPS FOR ANY COMPLE TED YEAR OF ASSESSMENT TILL THE DATE OF SEARCH WERE NOT FOUND IN COURSE OF SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERATION. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT IS CLEAR THAT IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF THE ASSE SSEE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ORISON MINERALS & PROPERTIES VS. DCIT, IT(SS)A NOS.31 TO 34/CTK/2017, ORDER DATED 17.05.2018, AS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND FOUND THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER OBSERVING AS UNDER : - 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE IN PURSUANCE TO ASSESSMENTS MADE U/S.153C OF THE ACT IN PURSUANCE TO A SEARCH CONDUCTED U/S.132 OF THE ACT ON 11.4.2012. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL, THE ORIGINAL RETURNS OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE TABULATED AS UNDER: ASST. YEAR DATE OF FILING OF RETURN U/S.139 RETURNED INCOME DUE DT. OF NOTICE U/S.143(2) 2007 - 2008 1.11.2007 RS.4,75,840 30.9.2008 2008 - 2009 5.11.2008 RS.20, 98,558 30.9.2009 2009 - 2010 30.9.2009 NIL 30.9.2010 2010 - 2011 15.10.2010 RS.27,42,080 30.9.2011 9. THUS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL WAS ABATED IN PURSUANCE TO THE SEARCH. IT IS SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT IN CASE OF UN - ABATED ASSESSMENT, ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN AN ASSESSMENT MADE U/S.153C OF THE ACT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE ABOVE PROPOSITION OF LAW IS WELL SETTLED IN THE FOLLOWING DECISION S: IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 8 1) PR..CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP. M/S.FEMS 'N' PETALS [2017) 395 ITR 526 (DEL). 2) ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. (2015) 374 1TR 645 (BOM) 3) PR. CIT - 2, KOLKATA VS M/S. SALASAR STOCK BROKING LTD., G.A.NO.1929 OF 2016(KOL) 4) PR. CIT VS. SOMAYA CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD., 387 ITR 529 (GUJ) 5) CIT VS. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT LTD ., 385 ITR 346 (KAR) 6) CIT VS. GURINDER SINGH BAWA , 386 ITR 143 (BOM) 7) PR. CIT VS. DHARMAPAL PREMCHAND LTD ., IN ITA NO. 512, 513 & 514/2016 ORDER DATED 21.08.2017(DELHI) 10. COMING TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE UNDER APPEAL , IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR THE EXPENSES INCURRED FOR TRANSPORTATION CHARGES. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED LEDGER COPY. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED 10% OF THE TOTAL EXPE NSES, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE IT(SS)A NOS. 31 T O 34/CT K/ 2017 ASSE SSMENT YEAR S : 2 007 - 08 , 20 08 - 09, 200 9 - 1 0, 2010 - 11 , CIT(A). LD D.R. COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY MATERIAL WHICH WAS UNEARTHED BECAUSE OF THE SEARCH. THUS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE A DDITION MADE ON ESTIMATE BASIS WAS NOT BASED ON ANY SEARCH MATERIAL. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE CITED DECISIONS, WE DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.8,53,176/ - FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, RS.31,25,558/ - FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09, RS.80,42,406/ - F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 AND RS.25,01,682/ - FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ALL THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 11. IN THE ABOVE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL QUASHED THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HOLDI NG THEREIN THAT WHEN NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH THEN, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. THE AFORESAID PRINCIPL E AND RATIO ARE CLEARLY APPLICABLE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ALSO . THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR MAKING ASSESSMENT U/S. 144/ 153A OF THE ACT. LD.DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE ABOVE FACTS BY BRINING ANY COGENT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT RETURN WAS FILED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT ON 05.11.2008 IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 9 AND THE DUE DATE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S.143(2) IS 30.09.20 09 FOR A.Y.200 8 - 20 09 . HOWEVER, THE SEARCH WAS CO NDUCTED IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 11.04.2012 AND THE AO FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT ON 31.03.2015, THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO WAS ABATED IN PURSUANCE TO THE SEARCH. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND QUASH THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S.144/153A OF THE ACT DATED 31.03.2015 . THUS, THE LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 12. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN IT(SS)A NO. 47/CTK/2016 IS ALLOWED ON THE LEGAL GROUND ONLY. 13. NOW, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.408/CTK/2019, WHEREIN THE SOLE ISSUE AGITATED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE AO WHILE PASSING THE APPEAL EFFECT FOR A.Y.2013 - 2014 HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ADVANCE TAX PAYMENT OF RS.33,33,333/ - THEREBY RAISING INCOME TAX DEMAND OF RS.33,43,310/ - WHICH IS COMPLETELY WRONG AND BAD IN LAW. 14. LD. AR BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAD PASSED THE APPEAL EFFECT ORDER IN RESPONSE TO ORDER U/S.250 OF THE IT ACT AS AGAINST THE APPELLATE O RDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON DATED 08.10.2018 THEREBY RAISING A INCOME TAX DEMAND OF RS. 33,43,310/ - . IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR THAT WHILE PASSING THE APPEAL EFFECT ORDER U/S. 250 OF THE IT ACT FOR THE AY 2013 - 14, THE AO HA S NOT CONSIDERED THE AD VANCE TAX IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 10 PAID FOR THE AY 2013 - 14 BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 33,33,333/ - . IN THIS REGARD, LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGES 7 TO 19 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCLOSED THE ADVANCE TAX PAYMENT OF RS. 33,33,333/ - IN ITS RETURN OF INCOM E. THEREFORE, THE LD. AR PRAYED THAT THE AO MAY KINDLY BE DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE ADVANCE TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. 15. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 16. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PER USING THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD ALONG WITH THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CONTAINING PAGES 1 TO 22, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID ADVANCE TAX OF RS.33,33,333/ - . HOWEVER, WHILE THE AO COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CON SIDERED THE ADVANCE TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ITR RETURN OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 2014, COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 7 TO 19 AND FOUND THAT AT PAGE NO.7, IN COLUMN 7(A) OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID ADVANCE TAX OF RS.33,33,333/ - . WE ALSO FOUND FROM THE ITR - 4 FORM IN THE SCHEDULE IT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED THE ADVANCE TAX OF RS.33,33,333/ - . HOWEVER, THE LD. AR BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN TAKE N INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE AO WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND IT (SS) A NO. 47/CTK/16 & ITA NO.408/CTK/19 11 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE THINK IT FIT TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO TO CONSIDER THE ADVANCE TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER VERIF YING AND EXAMINING THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATIVE WITH THE AO FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE C ASE. THUS, ITA NO. 408 /CTK/201 9 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 17 . IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. IT (SS) A NO. 47 /CTK/201 6 IS ALLOWED AND ITA NO. 408 /CTK/201 9 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 / 01 /20 20 . S D/ - ( C.M.GARG ) SD/ - (L.P.SAHU) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 28 / 01 /20 20 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA, SR.P.S. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWA RDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) ITAT CU TTACK BENCH, CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT - SAGAR KUMAR RAY, PLOT NO.MIG - 19, STAGE - II, LAXMI SAGAR, BHUBANESWAR - 6 2. / THE RESPONDENT - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1,BHUBANESWAR 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//