ADI EDUCATION & KNOWLEDGE CO. PVT. LTD., Thane V. D.C.I.T. CIR. - 1, THANE, TH

ITA 828/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8014 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOMNATH M WA J ALE
• Assessee Lawyers: SUDHIR DIXIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 828 / MUM . /2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 12 13 ) A DI EDUCATION & KNOWLEDGE CO. P. LTD. 601, 6 TH FLOOR, PARADISE TOWER GOKHALE ROAD, THANE (WEST) THANE 400 602 PAN AAHCA7857P . APPELLANT V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (I.T) CIRCLE 1, THANE . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUDHIR DIXIT REVENUE BY : SHRI SOMNATH M. WAJALE DATE OF HEARING 08 .0 4 .201 9 DATE OF ORDER 15.04.2019 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 15 TH FEBRUARY 2017, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) 1, THANE, PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 13. 2 . THE DISPUTE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IN RELATION TO THE ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF ` 1.25 CRORE. 2 ADI EDUCATION & KNOWLEDGE CO. P. LTD. 3 . BRIEF FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS A L EAD RE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR VARIOUS REPUTED UNIVERSITIES AND INSTITUTIONS IN INDIA AND ABROAD. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN DISPUTE, THE ASSESSEE ORIGINALLY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 27 TH AUGUST 2012 DECLARING INCOME OF ` 1,91,31,130. SUBS EQUENTLY, THE ASS ESSEE FILED REVISED RETURNS OF INCOME ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER 2012, DECLARING THE SAME INCOME AS WAS SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME AND AGAIN ON 6 TH JUNE 2013, SHOWING INCOME OF ` 66,31,130. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THE DIFFERENCE OF ` 1.25 CRORE BETWEEN THE TURNOVER SHOWN IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER 2012, AND THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 6 TH JUNE 20 13. WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN THE TURNOVER AS SHOWN IN THE TWO REVISED RETURNS OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED ITS EXPLANATION EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR SUCH DIFFERENCE. H OWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED , THE REASONS SHO WN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR FILING REVISED RETURN OF INCOME WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY PROPER DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE . HE OBSERVED , THERE ARE LOT S OF INCONSISTENC IES IN THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, HE OBSERVED , AS PER THE FINA NCIA L STATEMENT THOUGH THERE ARE NO MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN THE EXPENDITURE, HOWEVER, THERE IS HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE T URNOVER. ACCORDINGLY, DUE TO TH LACK OF 3 ADI EDUCATION & KNOWLEDGE CO. P. LTD. PROPER EXPLANATION BY T HE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE, HE ADDED BACK AN AMOUNT OF ` 1.25 CRORE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THOUGH, THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE AFORESAID ADDITION BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, HOWEVER, DUE TO NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, LEARN ED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 . THE ONLY SUBMISSION MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IS , ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN ITS CASE BEFO RE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE TURNOVER. 5 . HAVING CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT THOUGH THE HEARING OF APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) WAS FIXED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AS ENUMERATED IN PARA 2 OF THE APPEAL ORDER, HOWE VER, ON NONE OF THOSE OCCASIONS THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND REPRESENTED ITS CASE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CANNOT BE BLAMED FOR DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE. HOWE VER, CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US THAT GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE WOULD RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE TURNOVER BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO TAKE A LENIENT VIEW AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE RESTORE THE IS SUE S RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER DUE 4 ADI EDUCATION & KNOWLEDGE CO. P. LTD. OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO RESPOND TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING TO BE ISSUED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND CO OPERATE IN FINALIZING THE PROCEEDING. WE FURTHER MAKE IT CLEAR , IN THE EVENT OF ANY NON COOPERATION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEA LS) IS AT LIBERTY TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.04.2019 SD/ - MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 15.04.2019 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : ( 1 ) THE ASSESSEE; ( 2 ) THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) THE CIT(A); ( 4 ) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; ( 5 ) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; ( 6 ) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) ITAT, MUMBAI