R.G.Credit Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 655/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8134 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MAHAPATRA
• Assessee Lawyers: P K SENGHAI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Competent authority; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI, SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.655/KOL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 R.G. CREDIT PVT. LTD., 8, BENTINCK STREET, 1 ST . FLOOR, KOLKATA 700 001 [PAN:AABCR 2359D] V/S . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) /BY APPELLANT SHRI P.K. SENGHAI, AR /BY RESPONDENT SHRI A.K.MAHAPATRA, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 29-08-2012 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25-09-2012 O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, AM:- THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGITATING THE OR DER U/S. 263 OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR (A.Y) 2007-08 VIDE ORDER DATED 29-02-2012 BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX KOLKATA-II (CIT FOR SHORT). 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSM ENT IN THE INSTANT CASE WAS COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) ON 03-09-2012, ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS.23.33 LAKHS, I.E., AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS.20.96 LAKHS. ON T HE SCRUTINY, SUBSEQUENTLY, OF THE ASSESSMENT RECORD, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT T HAT WHILE THE AUDITED BALANCE-SHEET AS ON 31-03-2007, I.E., THE RELEVANT YEAR-END, REFL ECTED AN INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUNDS AT RS.203.62 LAKHS (PER SCHEDULE 4 THERETO), THE DETAILS OF THE PURCH ASES OF UNITS OF ITA NO.655/KOL/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 R.G. CREDIT PVT. LTD V. CIT, KOL-II PAGE 2 MUTUAL FUNDS, AS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IS FOR RS.186.57 LAKHS ONLY, SO THAT THE BALANCE, I.E., RS.17.05 LAKHS, R EMAINS UNEXPLAINED. FURTHER, AS STATED, THE ASSESSEE ON BEING QUESTIONED IN THE MATTER, COU LD NOT EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE . THE ASSESSMENT WAS ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE TO THAT EXTENT, REQUIRING A VERIFICATION OF THE SAID ASPECT. AGGRIE VED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERI AL ON RECORD. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DOES NOT REVEAL ANY INQUIRY INTO T HE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, I.E., THE INVESTMENT IN UNITS OF MUTUAL FUND S BY THE ASSESSEE. LACK OF PROPER INQUIRY, WHERE OTHERWISE DUE, IT IS TRITE LAW, MAKE S AN ASSESSMENT PER SE ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND AS TO HOW THE SAID VARIATION LEADS TO ANY INFERENCE AS TO ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME OR UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT; THE SAME BEING ONLY REFLECT ED AND FORMING PART OF THE ASSESSEES REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND, CONSEQUENT LY, THE AUDITED FINAL ACCOUNTS, SO THAT IT IS SOURCED ONLY FROM ACCOUNTED SOURCES. BEF ORE US, IT WAS THE COMMON CONTENTION OF THE PARTIES THAT THE MATTER BE RESTOR ED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY; HIS ORDER BEING NOT A SPEAKING ORDER, AN D WHICH WOULD ALSO ENABLE THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE HIM, AND IN RES PECT OF WHICH THE LD. AR WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ADEQUATE MATERIAL IN S UPPORT AND JUSTIFICATION OF ITS ACCOUNTS. WE DO NOT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, DEEM IT PROPER TO DWELL FURTHER IN THE MATTER, WHICH MAY REQUIRE EXAMINING THE RECORDS OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, SO AS THE ASCERTAIN THE PURPORT AND FULL SCOPE OF HIS FINDING AS REGARDS THE ASSESSEES INABILITY TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE, WHICH, TO OUR MIND, FORMS T HE FULCRUM OF HIS ORDER. THE MATTER IS ACCORDINGLY RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE REV ISIONARY AUTHORITY FOR A FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ISSUING DEFINI TE FINDINGS, I.E., WHERE HE CONTINUES TO OPINE AND HOLD THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT AS BEING ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE, I.E., QUA THE ASPECT AS DETERMINED BY HIM, AND AFTER ALLOWIN G PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO STATE ITS CAS E BEFORE HIM. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO.655/KOL/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 R.G. CREDIT PVT. LTD V. CIT, KOL-II PAGE 3 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) ( SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, *DKP - 25/09/2012 ! ! ! ! ''# ''# ''# ''# $ # $ # $ # $ # / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. %'& ' / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' - / CIT (A) 5. #() '''& , '& , *+% / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. ),- ./ / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ ! , ASST T. REGISTRAR, KOLKATA BENCHES STRENGTHEN PREPARATION & DELIVERY O F ORDERS IN THE ITAT 1) DATE OF TAKING DICTATION 29/08, 2) DIRECT DICTATION BY MEMBER STRAIGHT ON COMPUTER/LAPTOP/DRAGON DICTATE NO 3) DATE OF TYPING & DRAFT ORDER PLACE BEFORE MEMBER 30/08 4) DATE OF CORRECTION 07/09 5) DATE OF FURTHER CORRECTION 6) DATE OF INITIAL SIGN BY MEMBERS 07/09 7) ORDER UPLOADED ON /09 8) SHORT-HAND NOTE ATTACHED TO FILE YES 9) FINAL ORDER AND 2 ND COPY SEND TO BENCH CLERK ON /09 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 25/9/12 SD/- SD/- [ GEORGE MATHAN ] [ C.D RAO ] ITA NO.655/KOL/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 R.G. CREDIT PVT. LTD V. CIT, KOL-II PAGE 4