INDRAPRASTHA SERVICE STATION, NEW DELHI V. ITO, WARD-52(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 6294/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2999 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K JIWANI
• Assessee Lawyers: P J KHANNA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH SMC : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6294/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 INDRAPRASTHA SERVCIE STATION, VS. ITO, WARD-52(3) , C/O M/S P.N. KHANNA & COMPANY, CA NEW DELHI 14-15F, SHIVAM HOUSE, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI 110 001 (PAN: AABFI2538L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. P.J. KHANNA, CA REVENUE BY : SH. V.K. JIWANI, SR. DR ORDER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.08.2016 OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-18, NEW DELHI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2014-15. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT ON ORIGINAL RETURNED INCOME AS RS. 10,77,200/- WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE REVISED RETURN FILED AT RS. 8,71,000/- AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE TH AT INCOME OF RS. 2,06,100/- ALREADY ADDED BACK BY ASSESSING AUTHORITY FOR AY 2013-14 COULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AGAIN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING CHARGE OF INTEREST U/S. 234C AT RS. 96538/- WHICH WAS GROSSLY UNJUST, UNWARRANTED AND UNTENABLE IN LAW. 2 3. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 4. DURING THE HEARING, LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE COMPLETED ASSESSM ENT ON ORIGINAL RETURNED INCOME AS RS. 10,77,200/- WITHOUT CONSIDER ING THE REVISED RETURN FILED AT RS. 8,71,000/- AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UN DER REFERENCE. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT INCOME OF RS. 2,06,100/- ALREADY ADDED BACK BY AO F OR AY 2013-14 WHICH COULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AGAIN FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE I.E. AY 2014-15 AND ALSO STATED THA T LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE CHARGE OF INTEREST U/S. 234C AT RS. 96538/-. THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED THAT ALL THE ISSUES IN DISP UTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF REVISED RETURN AND TO VE RIFY THAT THE INCOME OF RS. 2,06,100/- ALREADY ADDED BACK BY THE AO FOR AY 2013- 14 COULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AGAIN FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE AND IF SO, THIS AMOUNT MAY BE EXCLUDED. S INCE THE QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AS AFORESAID, THE ISSUE OF CHA RGING OF INTEREST ALSO STAND REMITTED BACK TO THE AO TO DECIDE THE SA ME ACCORDINGLY. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AS EXPLAINED ABOVE, ALL THE 03 ISSUES STAND REMIT BAC K TO THE FILE OF THE 3 AO WITH THE AFORESAID DIRECTIONS AND GIVE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 19-03-2018. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 19-03-2018 SR BHATANGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.