M/s Madhu Enterprises, Secunderabad V. ACIT, Hyderabad

ITA 830/HYD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5982 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: H PHANI RAJU
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Agreed addition
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.: 830/HYD/2009 ASSTT. YEAR : 2004-05 SHRI RAJA REDDY, KARIM NAGAR (AKEPK 2074 L) VS ACIT, CIRCLE I, KARIM NAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI H. PHANI RAJU, DR O R D E R PER: CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) III, HYDERABAD DATED 30.4.2009 A ND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.17,32,000 BY TREATING THE CRE DITS IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE FOLLOWING PERSONS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE: A) SHRI T. BHAGAWAN REDDY RS.6,07,000 B) SMT. T. VIJAYA RS.4,25,000 C) SRI T. KONDAL REDDY RS.7,00,000 3. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER IN ARRIVING AT THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,73,94,103/- 4. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234B OF RS.27,93,878/-. 2 2 3. THE AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS WERE AGREED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT UNDERST ANDING THE FACTS OF THE CASE WHEREIN ALL THE CREDITORS HAVING IDENTI TY, CREDIT WORTHINESS AND THE TRANSACTIONS ARE GENUINE. THEY ARE T RANSACTED THROUGH BANKING CHALLANS, AND THERE IS NO NECESSITY FOR MAKING ADDITIONS ON THIS COUNT. HE PRAYED THE MATTER MAY BE SE T ASIDE TO EXAMINE THE FACTS AFRESH. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT HAVE ANY GRIEVANCE SINCE THE ADDITIONS AGREED BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE. HE FILED A COPY OF ORDER SHEET WHEREIN ADDITIONS AGREED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER SHE ET ENTERED DATED 23.12.2008 WHICH REVEALS AS FOLLOWS: AS PER THE INFORMATION ON RECORD, ONLY THE IDENTIT Y OF THE CREDITORS COULD BE ESTABLISHED, BUT NEITHER CREDIT WORTHINESS TO THE EXTENT CLAIMED OR ACTUAL OCCURRENCE OF THE LOAN TRANSACTIO N COULD BE ESTABLISHED. THEREFORE, I SEEK TO DISALLOW THE THR EE LOAN TRANSACTIONS: A) SHRI T. BHAGAWAN REDDY RS.6,07,000 B) SMT. T. VIJAYA RS.4,25,000 C) SRI T. KONDAL REDDY RS.7,00,000 TOTALING TO RS.17,32,000 BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE . THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE APPEARED AND DISCUSSED THE CASE A ND AGREED TO THE AFORE MENTIONED ADDITION AND HAVE PROMISED TO PAY T AX ON THE SAME. WE AGREE TO THE ABOVE ADDITIONS. 6. THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE IN VIEW OF THE CONSENT G IVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE BY GIVING THE CONSENT TO MAKE ADDITIO NS STOPPED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE ANY ENQUIRY. NOW T HE ASSESSEE CANNOT TAKE CONTRARY VIEW TO SEEK FOR DELETION OR FURT HER ENQUIRY OF THE 3 3 MATTER. IN CASE OF AGREED ADDITIONS, THE ASSESSEE PREVENT ED THE REVENUE FROM FURTHER PROBING THE MATTER. THUS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). FOR THIS PURPOSE, WE TAKE SUPPORT FROM T HE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI D. RAJARAO (HUF), KURNOOL DATED 29.7.2004 IN ITA NO.718/HYD/2002 (HYD. BENCH) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT: 7. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, ON MERITS WE F IND THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AFTER DUE DISCUSSION AND CONSENT OF NOT ONLY THE ASSESSEE BUT ALSO THE AUTHORIZED REPRE SENTATIVE AS WELL. ON 5.1.1996, THE NOTING IN THE ASSESSMENT FILE SHOW S THAT THE ASSESSEE AND THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAVE AGREED THAT THE NET INCOME BE ASSESSED AT RS.1,80,000. AGAIN ON 22.1.1997 THE AG REEMENT WAS REITERATED. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT SEE HOW THE ASSESSEE AGITATES THE ISSUE IN APPEAL. BY AGREEING TO SUCH AN ADDITION, THE ASSESSEE HAD EFFECTIVELY PREVENTED THE REVENUE FROM FURTHER PROBING INTO THE MATTER. THUS WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THIS APPEAL, WE D O NOT GO INTO THE ISSUE OF NATURAL JUSTICE BEFORE US, AS THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN HEARD IN FULL BY THIS BENCH AND THE ISSUE DECIDED ON MERIT. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT : 18. 2.2010 SD/- SD/- N.R.S. GANESAN CHANDRA POOJARI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 18 TH FEBRUARY, 2010 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.103, INDIRADE VI NILAYAM H.NO.3-6-542, HIMAYAT NAGAR, HYDERABAD. 2. ACIT, CIRCLE (1), KARIMNAGAR 3. CIT(A)- III, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT, HYDERABAD 5. THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD. NP