ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Ragas Educational Society, CHENNAI

ITA 592/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8419 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-03-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DURAI PANDIAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 12

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 592/MDS/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :200 7 - 0 8 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE I(2), CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S. RAGAS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, NO.2/102, EAST COAST ROAD, UTHANDI, CHENNAI 600 119. [PAN: AAATR3106Q] ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI DURAI PANDIAN, JCIT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 24 . 0 8 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 23 . 0 9 .201 6 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE L D. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) I , CHENNAI , IN ITA NO. 303/08 - 09 DATED 0 8 . 0 1 . 201 2 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 . 2. THE F ACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE RUNS AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OFFERING DENTAL COURSES VIZ., BDS, MDS & DENTAL, MECHANICAL COURSES, ETC. CONSEQUENT UPON A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION IN ITS CASE DATED 23.02.2007, THE ASSESSEE FILED A RETURN ADMITTING INCOME OF .5,05,03,922/ - I.T.A. NO. 592 /M/ 1 2 2 UNDER SECTION 115BBC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT]. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED .94,96,078/ - , THE CORPUS DONATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A) - I, CHENNAI , WHO CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE REMAND REPORT DATED 03.03.2011, INTER ALIA, THE ASSESSING OFFICER POINTED OUT THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED FOR MDS COURSE WAS .7,92,75,000/ - F OR 47 CANDIDATES . O UT OF WHICH, THE FEES RECEIVED FOR THE COURSE WAS .1,64,50,000/ - [@ .3,50,000/ - PER CANDIDATE FOR 47 CANDIDATES]. THE BALANCE .6,28,25,000/ - [ .7,92,75,000 .1,64,50,000/ - ] IS THE CAPITATION FEES RECEIVED FOR MDS COURSE. HOWEVER, TH E ASSESSEE ADMITTED .5,05,03,992/ - ONLY TOWARDS CORPUS DONATION UNDER SECTION 115BBC OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED .94,96,078/ - , REPRESENTING CORPUS DONATION, AS UNEXPLAINED CASH. THUS, THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD UNACCOUNTED CAPITATION FEES WAS .6 CRORES ONLY . THE BALANCE .28,25,000/ - ST OOD UN - ASSESSED . THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUESTED THE L D. CIT(A) TO ENHANCE THE ASSESSMENT BY .28, 25,000/ - . AFTER RECEIPT OF THE REMAND REPORT, THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THE APPEAL ORDER DATED 08.01.2012, WHEREIN, HE SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF .4 LAKHS ONLY. I.T.A. NO. 592 /M/ 1 2 3 3. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THAT ORDER, THE DEPARTMENT FILED TH IS APPEAL POINTING OUT THE FACTUAL REPO RT GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT DATED 03.03.2011 AND CONTENDED THAT THE L D. CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY GRANTED RELIEF OF .94,96,078/ - AND .28,25,000/ - WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT/ SEIZED MATERIALS. 4. BEFORE US, BY FILING A COP Y OF THE SWORN STATEMENT, SEIZED MATERIALS AND REMAND REPORT DATED 03.03.2011, THE L D. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE L D. CIT(A) FAILED TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE FACTS AND ADDRESS THE ENHANCEMENT PROPOS AL SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT . PER C ONTRA, THE L D. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE L D. CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AND SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE L D. CIT(A). 5 . WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BEL OW. F ROM THE MATERIALS FURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE REMAND REPORT FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER , IT IS CLEAR THAT THE L D. CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ENHANCEMENT PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ORDER . IN VIEW OF THAT, WE SET AS IDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE L D. CIT(A) AND REMIT TH IS ISSUE BACK TO THE L D. CIT(A), WHO SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITIES TO THE A SSESSEE A S WELL AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DECIDE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVE NUE ARE ALLOWED . I.T.A. NO. 592 /M/ 1 2 4 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23 RD OF SEPTEMBER, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( N.R.S. GANESAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 23. 0 9 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.