ITO, ward-58(6), New Delhi V. Amba Construction Co., Delhi

ITA 872/DEL/2020

AI Insights

The case involves the Income Tax Officer, Ward-58(6), New Delhi as the appellant and Amba Construction Company as the respondent. The appeal arises from the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, which quashed the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Officer under sections 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary contention by the Revenue was the legality of the re-assessment proceedings and the validity of the additions made by the Income Tax Officer, particularly concerning a sum of Rs.39,00,000 and an unverified loss in Futures and Options transactions amounting to Rs.1,31,91,367. The CIT(A) had found the additions incorrect and quashed the re-assessment, a decision which the Revenue appealed against, focusing on the procedural validity rather than the merits of the additions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 130690 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Futures and options
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.872/Del/2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12) Income Tax Officer Ward-58(6) New Delhi Vs. Amba Construction Company A-286, Main Road, Mandawali Surajmal Vihar East Delhi-110 092 PAN-AANFA 0579M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Mr. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Respondent by Mr. C.S. Anand, Advocate Date of Hearing 26/07/2023 Date of Pronouncement 26/07/2023 ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH AM: This appeal of the Assessee arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] in Appeal No.35/18-19/19-20/4329 dated 11/12/2019 against the order passed by Income Tax Officer, Ward-55(1), New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. AO’) u/s ITA No.872/Del/2020 ITO vs. Amba Construction Co. Page 2 of 4 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 24/12/2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that reasons recorded u/s 147 of the Act are based on factual errors and thus treating the entire re-opening, re-assessment proceedings as bad in law, vitiated the assessment order. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that once the addition of the proposed income from the fundamental issues ceases to exist, no other addition can be made.” 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. From the above grounds raised by the Revenue, it could be seen that the Revenue had only challenged the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in quashing the re-assessment proceedings as bad in law. We find from the order of Ld. CIT(A), in para 6.10, had categorically held that the addition made by the Ld. AO in the sum of Rs.39,00,000/- is incorrect as assessee had not entered into any sale transaction on 21/07/2010, which fact is also confirmed by the Sub-Registrar on enquiry made by the AO. Against this finding on merit, the Revenue had not preferred any appeal before us. Accordingly, what survives on merits is only the addition made on account of unverified loss in Futures and Options transactions of shares amounting to Rs.1,31,91,367/-. Though, the Ld. CIT(A) had ITA No.872/Del/2020 ITO vs. Amba Construction Co. Page 3 of 4 not given any finding on this addition on merits as the re- assessment has been quashed by him, still any addition that could be contested on merits by the Revenue would only to be the sum of Rs.1,31,91,367/-. From the aforesaid reproduction of grounds raised by the Revenue, it is very clear that Revenue does not have any grievance on the non-adjudication of the ground raised by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) on the addition made on account of Futures and Options loss amounting to Rs.1,31,91,367/-. Hence, the grounds raised by the Revenue on legal issue is purely academic and in any case, the tax effect on the disputed addition of Rs.1,31,91,367/- would be less than the prescribed monetary limits for filing of the appeal by the Revenue before this Tribunal. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts, various legal arguments advanced by both the parties on the quashing of re-assessment need not be gone into as this appeal is fit to be dismissed as not maintainable on the ground of low tax effect in view of CBDT vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. ITA No.872/Del/2020 ITO vs. Amba Construction Co. Page 4 of 4 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26 th July, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26/07/2023 Pk/sps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI