ACIT, New Delhi V. Smt. Alka Dass, New Delhi

ITA 6755/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4346 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES B DELHI BEFORE SHRI P.K.BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.6755/DEL/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 08-09) APPELLANT BY SH. ANSHU PRAKASH, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 21.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.09.2017 ORDER PER P.K.BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.09.2014 OF THE CIT(A)-XXVI, NEW DELHI RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE DECISION OF LD.CIT(A)S ORDER IS NOT ACCEPTABL E ON THE MERITS IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT TAKING CONSIDERATIO N OF FACTS THAT PROPER PROCEDURE FOR REOPENING HAS BEEN TAKEN. 3. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT TAKING INTO CONSIDER ATION OF FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE NOWHERE CHALLENGED THE ISSUE OF REOPENING/ JURISDICTION BEFORE ACIT, CIRCLE-50(1), NEW DELHI. VS ALKA DASS, 383-384, UPPER GROUND FLOOR, NEW RAJINDER NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110060. PAN-AETPD7635P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.6755/DEL/2014 2 ACIT-33(1), NEW DELHI DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS , THE CASE LAW ON WHICH THE LD.CIT(A) HAS RELIED ARE HAVING DIFFERENT CONNOTATIONS AND THAT DOES NOT FIT IN THE CASE. 2. NO ONE WAS APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE E VEN THOUGH THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT. 3. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GOING THOUGH THE ORDER OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE NOTED THAT THE CIT(A) HELD TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER TO BE NULL & VOID. IN VIEW OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DEC ISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD. 359 ITR 106 (2013) [DEL.] AND RANB AXY LABORATORIES LTD. VS CIT IN 336 ITR 136 (DELHI) [2011] BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 6.1. THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNOW AFTER GETTING SAT ISFIED WITH THE APPELLANT'S CONTENTION THAT SHE HAD NOT JURISDICTIO N OVER THE APPELLANT, TRANSFERRED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THIS ACTI ON OF THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNOW BASICALLY STRENGTHENS THE APPELLANT'S CONTE NTION THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN CONSEQUENCE TO THE NOTICES U/S 148 O F THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNOW ARE VOID AB-INITIO AS THE NOTICES U/S 148 W ERE ISSUED BY THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNOW WHICH HAD NO JURISDICTION OVER TH E APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF ABOVE CITED DECISIONS, NEEDLESS TO PLACE RELIANCE O N OTHER CASE LAWS, IT IS HELD THAT THE AO, NEW DELHI IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN COMPLETI NG THE REASSESSMENTS IN CASE OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE RELEVANT AYS IN PURSU ANCE OF THE NOTICES U/S 148 WHICH HAD BEEN ISSUED BY THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNO W BECAUSE THE ACIT, RANGE-IV, LUCKNOW IS HELD TO HAVE NO JURISDICTION O N THE APPELLANT ON THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF SUCH NOTICES U/S 148. ITA NO.6755/DEL/2014 3 6.2 FURTHER, THE ABOVE CASES ARE ALSO ANALYZED FROM DIFFERENT ANGLE ALSO. THE AO ISSUED NOTICES U/S 148 FOR THESE AYS ON THE REAS ONING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD MADE SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENTS IN IMMOVABLE PROPE RTIES IN THESE YEARS; WHICH PRIMA-FACIE APPEARED UNEXPLAINED; THUS, THE I NCOME TO THE EXTENT OF THE INVESTMENTS MADE IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES IN THE RELEVANT YEARS HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENTS. PURSUANT TO THE APPELLANT'S EX PLANATIONS, THE AO DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION FOR WHICH THESE ASSESSMENTS W ERE REOPENED. THE APPELLANTS CASE OF THESE TWO YEARS ARE HELD SQUARE LY COVERED BY THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CA SES OF LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD.; 359 ITR 106 AND RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. 336 ITR 136 AND THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THESE DECISIONS, IT IS HELD THAT THE REAS SESSMENTS, PRIMA-FACIE, ARE NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCE MENTS. 6.3. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, THE APPELLANTS REASSESSMENT S IN THE ABOVE TWO AYS ARE HELD TO BE NULL AND VOID. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMP UGNED ORDERS ARE ANNULLED. 4. LD. DR EVEN THOUGH RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO BUT COULD NOT CONVINCE US THAT HOW THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) ARE ILLEG AL AND NOT COVERED BY THE JURISDICTION OF THE HIGH COURT. WE, THEREFORE, CON FIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 SEPTEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (P.K.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATE:- 21.09.2017 *AMIT KUMAR* ITA NO.6755/DEL/2014 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, DELHI