ITO, Proddatur V. Dr Y K Siva Reddy, Proddatur

ITA 859/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3094 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 1993-1994
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R B BAIK
• Assessee Lawyers: CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANSAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.859 & 860/HYD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1993-94 & 1994-95 THE ITO WARD NO.1, PRODDATUR VS DR Y.K. SIVA REDDY, PRODDATUR. (PAN AFJPS 7005 R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.B. BAIK, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI CHAITANYA KUMAR O R D E R PER: CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THESE TWO APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE ARE D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-TIRUPATHI DATE D 18/2/2002 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1993-94 & 1994-95. 2. THE REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: THE INFERENCE BY THE CIT(A), TIRUPATHI THAT THERE I S DELAY U/S 153 WAS HAPPENED AND THAT THE ORDERS PASSED ARE BAD IN LAW IS INCORRECT AND THAT THE ADDITIONS DO NOT SUSTAIN IN LAW IS ERRONEO US. (COPY OF THE ITAT ORDER RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIT, TIRUPATHI ON 21.06.2007 IS ENCLOSED). CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF ON LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234 A AND U/S 234B. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE CIT(A) ANNU LLED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MAD E IN CONTRAVENTIONS OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.153(2A) OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT. ACCORDING TO THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE BEFO RE THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WH ICH THE SAID ORDER OF THE ITAT IS RECEIVED. SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHEN THE ITAT ORDER DATED 31.10.2006 WERE RECEIVED, HE P RESUMED THAT THE ORDERS WERE RECEIVED IN THE NORMAL COURSE BEFORE MARCH 2 007 AND HENCE THE TIME LIMIT FOR REDOING THE SET ASIDE ASSESSMENT EXPIR ES ON 31.3.2008 ITA NO.859 & 860 OF 2010 DR.Y.K. SIVA REDDY, PRODDATUR 2 AND THE REASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE PASSED ON 31.12.2008, ACCOR DINGLY, HE ANNULLED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. AGAINST THIS, THE REVE NUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BOTH THE PARTIES FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ITAT ORDER DATED 31.10.2006 WAS RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF CIT(A)- THIRUPATHI ON 21.6.2007 AND AS SUCH BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON M ERIT. WE AGREED TO THE CONTENTION OF BOTH THE PARTIES. THE RE-ASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE PASSED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT AS PROVIDED U/S 153(2A) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE REVERSE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON LEGAL I SSUE AND SET ASIDE THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234A AND 234B OF THE IT ACT TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE IS ALLO WED PARTLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 14 .7.2010 SD/- SD/- N.R.S. GANESAN CHANDRA POOJARI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 14 TH JULY, 2010 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE.Y.K. REDDY, PROPRIETO R, GURU PRASHANTHI NURSING HOME, D.NO.3-1201, T.B. ROAD, PRODDATUR. 2. ITO, WARD NO.1, PRODDATUR. 3. CIT(A)- THIRUPATHI & PRODDATUR.. 4. CIT(A) , HYDERABAD CIT, HYDERABAD 5 THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD. NP