S.B.POLYMERS, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 520/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99408 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Validity of assessment; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 520/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05. M/S. S.B. POLYMERS, G-253C, ROAD NO. 12, VKI AREA, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAEFS 3527 N VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL, C.A. JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/10/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/11/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-II, JAIPUR DATED 12.05.2014 CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT. THE GROUNDS TAKEN IN THE APPEAL IS AS UNDER :- 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ER RED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT OF ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO U/S 147/143(3). 2. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ER RED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT WHEN TH E INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVISED RETURN IS ACCEPTED B Y THE AO, NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 TO ASSESS THE SAME INCOME WHEN THE T IME LIMIT FOR FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) WITH REFERENCE TO THE REVISED RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS AVAILABLE, IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 2 ITA NO. 520/JP/2014 A.Y. 2004-05. M/S. S.B. POLYMERS VS. ITO JAIPUR. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON 11.10.2004 DECLARING TOT AL INCOME OF RS. 2,77,751/-. THEREAFTER RETURN WAS REVISED ON 31.05.2005 AT A TO TAL INCOME OF RS. 7,64,760/- BY DECLARING ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 4,87,004/- WHICH WAS NOT DOUBTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE AO WITHOUT PROPERLY VERIFYING THE REVISED RETURN PENDING WITH HIM, ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WHICH WAS OBJECTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REQUESTED TO PROVIDE COPY OF REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSEE. T HE AO DID NOT GIVE THE COPY OF REASONS BUT ALLOWED THE ASSESSEE TO READ IT FROM HI S FILE. AFTER READING THE REASONS, ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 23.11.2011 EXPLAINED THA T THE INCOME OF RS. 2,50,000/- ALLEGED AS CONCEALED IN THE REASONS RECORDED HAS AL READY BEEN INCLUDED IN THE REVISED RETURN. SINCE THE INCOME WHICH WAS ALREADY DISCLOS ED CANNOT BE BASIS OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THE PROCEEDINGS MAY KINDLY B E DROPPED. THE AO, HOWEVER, WITHOUT DISPOSING OFF THE OBJECTION, FRAMED THE REA SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE SAME AMOUNT. 3. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL. THE LD. CIT (A) UPHELD THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS :- 2.3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE; ASS ESSMENT ORDER AND APPELLANTS WRITTEN SUBMISSION. ASSESSING OFFICER R EOPENED ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSED THE APPELLANT ON THE SAME INCOME AT WH ICH IT WAS ASSESSED EARLIER. THEREFORE, IT IS CLER THAT EVEN AFTER REOP ENING THE ASSESSMENT, ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION WHICH C AN BE CONTESTED IN APPEAL. SINCE NO ADDITION WAS MADE, THERE IS NO CON TESTABLE GROUND FOR APPEAL AND THEREFORE GROUND NUMBER 1 AND 2 ARE DISM ISSED. 3 ITA NO. 520/JP/2014 A.Y. 2004-05. M/S. S.B. POLYMERS VS. ITO JAIPUR. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT O NCE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 31.05.2005 INCLUDING ADDITIONAL INCOME , THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 AFTER A GAP OF SIX YEARS R ECORDING THE REASONS OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. THE LD. CIT (A) INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL HOLDING THAT NO CONTESTABLE GR OUND IS RAISED. THE LD. A/R PRAYED THAT THE REASSESSMENT IS BAD IN LAW AND THE SAME BE QUASHED. 5. I HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. THE DETAILED FACTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN NARRATED BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN HIS ORDER. A SPECIFIC LEGAL GROUND WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. I N THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT (A) SHOULD HAVE DECIDED THE LEGAL ISSUE BY OBSERVIN G AS IT MAY BE SINCE THE INCOME WAS ALREADY DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE BY A REVISED RETU RN FILED 6 YEARS PRIOR ON 31.05.2005. THE SAID INCOME CANNOT PARTAKE THE CHARACTER OF ALL EGED CONCEALED INCOME. IN THE ENTIRETY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I FIND MERIT IN THE ARGUMENT OF LD. COUNSEL. THE REASSESSMENT IN QUESTION IS BAD IN LAW AND IS QUASHED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/11/2015 . SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 13/11/ 2015 DAS/ 4 ITA NO. 520/JP/2014 A.Y. 2004-05. M/S. S.B. POLYMERS VS. ITO JAIPUR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. S.B. POLYMERS, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO WARD 4(2), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.520/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 5 ITA NO. 520/JP/2014 A.Y. 2004-05. M/S. S.B. POLYMERS VS. ITO JAIPUR.