M/s. Builtage, Ahmedabad V. The CIT,A'bad-IV, Ahmedabad

ITA 799/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 79920514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-05-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

, , , , , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , , , . .. . . .. . , , , , !' ! # !' ! # !' ! # !' ! # BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.799/AHD/2011 ( % & '& % & '& % & '& % & '& / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) M/S.BUILTAGE 802-PARSHWA TOWER OPP.RAJPATH CLUB S.G.HIGHWAY, AHMEDABAD % % % % / VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD-IV, AHMEDABAD ( !' ./)* ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAGFB 3278 H ( (+ / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ,-(+ / RESPONDENT ) (+ . ! / APPELLANT BY : - NONE - ,-(+ / . ! / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O.P. BATHEJA, SR.DR %0 / ' / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 28/5/2014 12' / ' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/5/14 !3 / O R D E R PER SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING F ROM THE ORDER U/S.263 OF THE ACT PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDABAD-IV, DATED 29/12/2010 FOR ASST.YEAR 2006 -07 AS PER THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (1) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDA BAD-IV, AHMEDABAD HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN EXERCISING JURISDICTION U/S.263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AN D SETTING ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO U/S.143(3) OF HE I.T.ACT DATED ITA NO.799/AHD/ 2011 M/S. BUILTAGE VS. CIT ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 2 - 18/05/2009 FOR A.Y. 2007-08 AND DIRECTING THE AO TO MAKE RE- INVESTIGATION OF THREE SPECIFIED MATTERS. (2) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHME DABAD-IV, AHMEDABAD HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DIRECTING THE AO TO MAKE REINVESTIGATION OF THREE SPECIFIED MATT ERS, ON THE ERRONEOUS GROUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO MAKE INVESTIGATION AND PROPER VERIFICATION IN RESPECT OF KASAR EXPENSES, WORK IN PROGRESS AND CARTING EXPENSES. (3) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDA BAD-IV, AHMEDABAD HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN EXERCISING JURISDICTION U/S.263 OF THE I.T. ACT AND PASSING TH E IMPUGNED ORDER HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY HE AO I S ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE ON THE GROUN D THAT THE AO FAILED TO MAKE INVESTIGATION AND PROPER VERIFICATI ON AND THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE PROPER INVESTIGATION. (4) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDA BAD-IV, AHMEDABAD HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S.263 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FAC T THAT IN THE COURSE OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT HAS PRODUCED BEFORE HE AO COMPLETE DETAILS ON ALL MATER IAL RELEVANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THE ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING HE ISSUES THE ISSUES COVERED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S.263 OF THE ACT AD THE AO WHO HAS PASSED THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS MADE DUE V ERIFICATION AND SCRUTINY OF ALL THE MATERIAL, WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM PARA 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS REPRODUCED BELOW: THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING BUSINESS AS A DEVELOPER. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND OT HER DOCUMENTS CALLED FOR AN THE SAME WAS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE T EST CHECKED. THE DETAILS FURNISHED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE WERE KEPT ON HE FIL E. AFTER DETAILED DISCUSSING WITH A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE A ROUND SOME O F RS.60,000/- IS PROPOSED TOWARDS ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE FOR VARIOUS EXPENSES LIKE LABOUR, WATER, CARTING & TELEPHONE EXPENSES TO COVER-UP UNVOUCHED BILLS/VOUCHERS IN HE ASSESSEE LINE OF BUSINESS AND ALSO IN VIEW OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR WHICH HE A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS PARTNER OF HE FIRM HAS COZENED FOR THE SAME. (ADDITION 60,000/-) (5) THE APPELLANT THEREFORE, SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER U/S.143(3) DATED 18/05/2009 WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED A FTER DUE VERIFICATION AND SCRUTINY IS NEITHER ERRONEOUS NOR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. (6) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDA BAD-IV, AHMEDABAD HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE ITA NO.799/AHD/ 2011 M/S. BUILTAGE VS. CIT ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 3 - IMPUGNED ORDER U/S.263 IN UTTER DISREGARD TO THE RA TIO OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF CIT VS. HONDA SEIL POWER PRODUCTS LTD. REPORTED IN 2010-TOI L-468-HC- DEL-IT AND ITAT MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CRISIL LTD. VS ADDL. CIT REPORTED IN 2010-TOIL-382-ITAT-MUM WHICH WERE S PECIFICALLY BROUGHT TO HIS NOTICE. (7) IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S. 263 PASSED BY THE CIT MAY PLEASE BE CANCELLED. (8) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS SEEN FROM THE RECORD TH AT NOTICE DATED 5/5/2014 HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY FIXING THE DATE FOR HEARING ON 28/05/2014 (AS PER EVIDENCE ON RECORD). HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, I.E. ON 28-05-2014 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. THIS SHOWS THAT THE APPELL ANT-ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THIS APPEAL SINCE THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING WITH ITS APPEAL. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) AND OF HON'BLE DELHI TRIBUNAL DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) , WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED HER EINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- ( ) ( .. ) !' ( MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT ) ( T.R. MEENA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 30/5/2014 ..%, .%../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO.799/AHD/ 2011 M/S. BUILTAGE VS. CIT ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 4 - !3 / ,4 5!4' !3 / ,4 5!4' !3 / ,4 5!4' !3 / ,4 5!4'/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-(+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. 49: ,% , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :;& <0 / GUARD FILE. !3% !3% !3% !3% / BY ORDER, -4 , //TRUE COPY // = == =/ // / ) ) ) ) ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. COPIED MATTER(DICTATION-PAD - PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 28.5.14 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER PLACED BEFORE OTHER MEMBER 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.30.5.14 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 30.5.14 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER