Agfa India Private Ltd., Thane V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,

ITA 582/PUN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9216 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANAND KANKARIYA
• Section: 143(3); 263; 63

Judgement Text

] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO.582/PUN/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 AGFA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, (NOW MERGED WITH AGFA HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED), UNIT 402, 4 TH FLOOR NITCO BIZ PARK, PLOT NO.C/19, ROAD NO.16, WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THANE 400 604. PAN : AABCB2567K. . / APPELLANT V/S DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, THANE. . / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANAND KANKARIYA. REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJEEV KUMAR, CIT. / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE O RDER OF DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, THANE DT.15.01.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON R ECORD ARE AS UNDER :- / DATE OF HEARING : 27.02.2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28 .02.2018 2 2.1 ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DISTRIBUTION OF PHOTOGRAPHIC AND ELECTRONIC IMAGING SYSTEM. ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2008-09 ON 27.02.2009 DEC LARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.18,50,34,493/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SC RUTINY AND THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT V IDE ORDER DT.14.12.2011. LD. CIT THEREAFTER NOTICED THAT AO HAD P ASSED ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 14.12.2011 BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.5,70 ,49,840/- WITHOUT ISSUING DRAFT ORDER OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE ASSESSEE AS REQUIRED U/S 144C OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT THEREFORE, VIDE ORDER DT.29.01.2014 PASSED ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT, HELD TH AT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO TO BE NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH LAW AND THEREFORE THE ORDER PASSED BY AO U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT TO BE ERRONE OUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. HE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE TH E ORDER AND DIRECTED THE AO TO PASS A FRESH ORDER AFTER FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN U/S 144C OF THE ACT. PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF LD. CIT, ORDER WAS PASSED BY AO U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144(C)(13) OF THE ACT VID E ORDER DT.15.01.2016 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.2 4,20,84,330/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD.A.R. SUBMITTED THAT AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT, ASSESSE E HAD PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TH E TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS.341/PN/2014 AND ITA NO.1072/PN/2014 VIDE ORDER DT .28.10.2015 HAD CANCELLED THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT U/S 263 OF TH E ACT. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF THE AFORESAID ORDER OF TRIBUNAL AND POINTED TO THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED TH AT, SINCE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT U/S 263 OF THE ACT ITSELF HAS BEE N QUASHED, THE 3 CONSEQUENTIAL IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY AO U/S 143(3) R. W.S. 144C(13) OF THE ACT, PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS U/S 263 OF THE AC T DOES NOT SURVIVE. LD.D.R. DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD.A.R. BUT HOWEVER SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AO. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT INITIALLY THE OR DER WAS PASSED BY AO U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DT.14.12.2011. THEREA FTER, LD. CIT VIDE ORDER DT.29.01.2014 HELD THAT THE ORDER OF AO PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT TO BE ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE AND ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DT.28.10.2015 QUASHED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT DT.29.01.2014. SINCE THE ORDER OF LD. CI T PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT ITSELF HAS BEEN CANCELLED, THE CONSEQUENTIA L IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS PASSED U/S 2 63 OF THE ACT BY AO DOES NOT SURVIVE AND THEREFORE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN RENDERED ACADEMIC. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 28 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER '! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 28 TH FEBRUARY, 2018. YAMINI 4 #$%&'('% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. 4. 5 6. CIT(A), 13, PUNE. CIT(IT/TP), PUNE. '#$ %%&',) &', / DR, ITAT, A PUNE; $,-./ GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // // TRUE COPY // /01%2&3 / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) &', / ITAT, PUNE.