Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur V. M/s . Reshma Builders (P) Ltd., Kanpur

ITA 525/LKW/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 52523714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 07-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA
• Assessee Lawyers: P K KAPOOR

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.525/LKW/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004 - 05 A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, KANPUR. VS. M/S RESHMA BUILDERS (P) LTD., 7/103, SWAROOP NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAACR6388R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.23/LKW/2013 (IN ITA NO.525/LKW/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004 - 05 M/S RESHMA BUILDERS (P) LTD., 7/103, SWAROOP NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAACR6388R VS. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, KANPUR. (OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY SHRI Y. P. SRIVASTAVA, D. R. ASSESSEE BY SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C.A. DATE OF HEARING 07/08/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 7 /09/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - I, KANPUR DATED 30/07/2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 2005. 2. FIRST WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: 2 1. THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT NO SATISFACTION NOTE WAS EVER RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON BEFORE ISSUING THE NOTICE U/S 153C THOUGH THE SATISFACTION OF THE AO HAS BEEN NARRATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE BODY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 153C. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN THIS CASE THE AO, IN THE CASE OF 'SEARCHED PERSON' I.E. M/S BANARASI MISTHAN BHANDAR (P) LTD., AND IN THE CASE OF PRESENT ASSESS EE IS ONE AND SAME AND THEREFORE, RATIO OF CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI, AS APPLIED BY LD. CIT(A), WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. 3. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AND ON FACTS AND DESERVES TO BE VACATED AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. BE RESTORED. 3. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. REGARDING THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THIS CLAIM THAT SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCHED PERSON FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 153C, HE SUBM ITTED A COPY OF LETTER DATED 15/07/2014 RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. AS AGAINST THIS, LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON A RECENT JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT (CENTRAL) VS. GOPI APARTMENT IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 60 OF 214 DATED 01/05/2014. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF THIS JUDGMENT IS AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 39 TO 54 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND IN THIS CASE , IT WAS HELD BY HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT THAT IF NO SATISFACTION HAS BEEN RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCHED PERSON, THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE OTHER PERSON U/S 153C ARE NOT VALID. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT IT IS SPECIFICALLY REPORTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS LETTER DATED 15/07/2014 THAT NO SATISFACTION NOTE COULD BE LOCATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE 3 THE REVENUE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THAT ANY SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCHED PERSON, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT CITED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING B EEN RENDERED IN THE CASE OF GOPI APARTMENT (SUPRA). WE, THEREFORE, HOLD THAT THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 153C IS NOT VALID AND THEREFORE, WE QUASH THE SAME. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. THE CR OSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED BECAUSE WHEN THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF IS QUASHED, NO ADDITION SURVIVES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUN IL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 7 /09/2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR