Shri Henant Bhaskar Garud, Pune V. DCIT, Cir.-3, Pune

ITA 589/PUN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 56407 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANN KAPTHUAMA
• Keywords: Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C.SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER ITA NO. 589/PN/2010 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1995-96 TO 2001-02) SHRI HEMANAT BHASKAR GARUD GARUD HOUSE, 1101/1, MODEL COLONY ROAD, PUNE - 411 016. .. AP PELLANT PAN ABEPG6929M VS. DY.CIT, CIR.3, PUNE .. RESPONDEN T APPELLANT BY: SHRI SUNIL GANOO, AR RESPONDENT BY: ANN KAPT HUAMA, DR ORDER PER D.KARUNAKARA RAO, A.M .: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) II, PUNE D ATED 18-2- 2010 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 1995-96 TO 2001-02. 2. FOLLOWING ARE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEAL. 1. IN THE ABSENCE OF CONDITIONS PRECEDENT FOR ASSUM PTION OF JURISDICTION U/S 158BD OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 THE IMP UGNED BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD.CIT(A) BEING PATAENTLY ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW NULL AND VOID AB INITIO AND BEING WITHUT JURISDICTI ON, THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE VACATAAED. 2. SINCE THE IMPUGNED BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSE D BY THE LD.ASSESSING OFFICER AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE LD.CIT (A) BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION AS PROVIDED U/S 158BE OF THE I .T.ACT, 1961, THE SAME IS LEGALLY UNSUSTAINABLE, PATENTLY I LLEGAL, BAD IN LAW, NULL AND VOID AB INITIO AND WITHOUT JURISDI CTION AND HENCE THE 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN MECHANICALLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,36,000 AS MADE BY THE LD.ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THE SAID ADDI TION BEING ARBITRARY, PERVERSE AND BASED ON SURMISEWS AND CONJ ECTURES THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE M ENTIONED THAT GROUND NO.1 RAISES THE LEGAL ISSUE RELATING TO THE VALIDITY OF THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT. IN THIS REGARD, HE FILED A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE U/S 158BC OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF AN A SSESSEE VIZ., MAHESHWARI FINANCIERS WHICH IS COVERED BY THE PROVI SIONS OF SEC.158BC OF THE ACT. FURTHER, THE LEARNED COUNSEL MENTIONED THAT THE SAID ORDER OF ASSESSMENT WAS MADE ON 24-12-2003 . THE COUNSEL FURTHER BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE, A NOTICE ISS UED U/S 158BD OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE AND ARG UED THAT THE IMPUGNED NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 15-4-2004 INVOLVING A DELAY OF NEARLY FOUR MONTHS . THE COUNSEL MENTIONED THAT SUCH ASSESSMENTS ARE NULL AND VOID IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUPREME COURT S DECISION IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI REPORTED IN 289 ITR 321. THE HEAD NOTE OF THE SAID DECISION WAS READ OUT BEFORE US IN SUPP ORT OF THE ABOVE PROPOSITION. 4. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, GROUND NO.1 OF THE AS SESSEE IS ALLOWED . CONSIDERING THE DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS EE I THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE, THE ADJUDICATION OF OTHER GROUND S, IN OUR OPINION, IS MERELY AN ACADEMIC EXERCISE. THEREFORE, THEY SAM E ARE DISMISSED AS ACADEMIC IN NATURE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 26-8-2011. SD/- SD/- (I.C.SUDHIR) (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 26 -8-2011 COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE 2) DCIT, CIRCLE 3, PUNE 3) THE CIT (A) II, PUNE 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE.