Subhash Chandra Goel, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 824/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90709 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , C B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! # , $ & BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO . 824/MDS/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA GOEL, 3-B, TENERIFE TERRACE 173, PERIYAR EVR ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI-600 010. VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-V CHENNAI-34. PAN:AAQPS9216A ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. G.BASKAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 1 ST JUNE, 2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 TH JULY, 2015 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-VIII), CHEN NAI DATED 18.01.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AR ISING OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE AC T. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF IN COME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ELECTRONICALLY ON 30.0 9.2009 ADMITTING INCOME OF ` 37,12,030/- UNDER NORMAL COMPUTATION AFTER ADJUSTING BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/-. INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) WAS PASSED ON 4.9.2010 ASSESSI NG THE 2 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 INCOME AT ` 45,76,420/-. WHILE PASSING THE INTIMATION THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALOR E, DID NOT CONSIDER BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/-. THE ASSESSEE MOVED APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT STATING THAT CARRIED FORWARD BUSINESS LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- WAS NOT ADJUSTED AGAINST THE INCOME AND THIS RESULTED I N DEMAND OF ` 2,64,463/-. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR RECTIFICATIO N OF INTIMATION PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(1). AGAINST THI S RECTIFICATION APPLICATION, A COMMUNICATION WAS SENT BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALOR E STATING THAT AS SEEN FROM THE SCHEDULE OF CARRY FOR WARD LOSS AND RETURN OF INCOME FILED, NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN GI VEN AS TO THE BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES, THEREFORE THE SYSTEM HA S CORRECTLY NOT ALLOWED THE SAME FOR SET OFF. ASSESSE E FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) STATING THAT IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BU SINESS LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 WAS WRONGLY SHOWN AS LOSS FROM OTHER SOURCES INSTEAD OF BUSINESS LOSS. THEREFORE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE IN FILLING UP THE COLUMN IN THE RETURN OF I NCOME FILED ELECTRONICALLY AND REQUESTED FOR DIRECTION TO RECTI FY MISTAKE BY 3 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 ACCEPTING SET OFF OF CARRY FORWARD BUSINESS LOSS O F THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AGAINST THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) REJECTED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STATI NG THAT NO DETAILS OF LOSS INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 HAVE BEEN FILED AND IT IS A LSO NOT KNOWN ON WHAT OCCASION LOSS AROSE AND WHY THIS LOS S IS CARRY FORWARD TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR S ET OFF. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ABOVE DETAILS, COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE. 3. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US FILED TWO PA PER BOOKS CONTAINING COPY OF RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 FILED ELECTRONICALLY AND THE OTHER PAPER BO OK CONTAINS PAGES 1 TO 39, WHEREIN COPIES OF RETURNS FILED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2006-07 ELECTRONICALLY, RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, INTIMATION FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2007-08, APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2007-08 FOR RECTIFICATION OF INTIMATION PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) ELECTRONICALLY RETURN FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(1 ) FOR 4 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. REFERRING TO PAGE 25 OF TH E PAPER BOOK, WHICH CONTAINS ELECTRONIC RETURN FILED FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN THE SCHEDULE FOR CARRY F ORWARD OF LOSSES, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED OTHER SOURCE S LOSS ADJUSTED AT ` 8,64,454/-. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT IN FACT THIS LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- IS NOT LOSS FROM OTHER SOURCES BUT BUSINESS LOSS PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 WHICH WAS WRONGLY SHOWN AS LOSS FROM OTHER SOURCES. REFERRING TO VARIOUS PAGES FROM 1 TO 16 OF THE OTHER PAPER BOOK, COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THESE ARE REPRESEN TING COPIES OF RETURNS AND COMPUTATIONS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE WHEREIN IT WAS SHOWN THAT THERE WAS BUSINESS LOSS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 AND 2003-04. COUNSEL SUBMI TS THAT THESE RETURNS ARE PART OF RECORDS FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE NORMAL COURSE AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITHOUT VERIFY ING ALL THESE RECORDS SIMPLY REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE INCURRED BUSINESS LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. THEREFORE, HE PRAYS THAT A DIRECTION MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SET OFF OF 5 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 BUSINESS LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- AGAINST THE INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND RECOMPUTE THE INCOME. 4. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTS THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. HE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT IN THE A BSENCE OF ANY DETAILS FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES THEY ARE RIGHT IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHOR ITIES AND THE MATERIALS PLACED BEFORE US. ASSISTANT COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, REJECTED THE ASSESSE ES RECTIFICATION PETITION FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE RETURN FILED ELECTRONICALLY ABOUT THE BUSINESS LOSS SAID TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AT ` 8,64,454/-. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALSO REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE O BSERVING THAT NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE HIM SUGGESTING THAT ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED LOSS OF ` 8,64,454/- DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. THEREFORE, IN T HE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS, HE REJECTED THE CLAIM OF TH E ASSESSEE. NOW THE ASSESSEE FILES COPIES OF RETURN FOR ASSESSM ENT YEARS 6 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 2003-04 TO 2009-10 AND RETURN FILED ELECTRONICALLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND SUBMITS THAT THERE WAS BUSINESS LOSS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND T HE ASSESSEE HAS WRONGLY MENTIONED THE BUSINESS LOSS AS OTHER SOURCES IN THE RETURN FILED ELECTRONICALLY. ON HEAR ING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS MATTER HAS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN DETAIL WITH RE FERENCE TO THE RETURNS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEARS 2003-04 TO 2009-10 AND TO SEE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS ANY BUSINESS LOSS AS CONTENDED AND WHETHER SUCH BUS INESS LOSS IS STILL REMAINING FOR SET OFF OR NOT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ALL THESE ISSUES HAVE TO BE EXAMINED WITH REFERENCE TO RECORDS. THUS, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE B ACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO E XAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY T O THE ASSESSEE. IF IT IS FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS BUSINESS LOSS TO THE EXTENT OF ` 8,64,454/-, THE SAME MAY BE SET OFF AGAINST THE INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AS SUCH LOSS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF EIG HT YEARS. 7 ITA NO.824 /MDS/2012 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH JULY, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( # ) ( & (# ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ) * / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( * / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( /CHENNAI, , /DATED 24 TH JULY, 2015 SOMU ./ 0/ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. 1 () /CIT(A) 4. 1 /CIT 5. / 5 /DR 6. /GF .