DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad V. Divya Shakti Granites Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 887/Hyd/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4522 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L . P . SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) ITA NO. 887 /HYD/20 15 & C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 - 10 ) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 17(1), HYDERABAD. ..APPELLANT. VS. M/S. DIVYA SHAKTI GRANITES LTD. , 7 - 1 - 58, DIVYA SHAKTI COMPLEX, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD. ..RESPONDENT /CROSS OBJECTOR . PAN AABCD 0680K ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PAWAN KUMAR CHAKRAPANI. RE VENUE BY : SHRI SUNKU SRINIVAS. (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING : 7.9. 2021. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17 .0 9 .2021. O R D E R PER SHRI S.S. GODARA, J.M. : TH IS REVENUES APPEAL AND ASSESSEE'S CROSS OBJECTION ITA NO.887 AND 59/HYD/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09 - 10 ARISE FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 5 , HYDERABAD S ORDER DT. 16.03.2015 PASSED IN CASE NO. 0657/2014 - 15/CIT(A) - 5 IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER S ECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). 2 ITA NO. 887/HYD/2015 & C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES . C ASE FILE PERUSED. 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE ASSESSEE'S C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 RAISES THE FIRST AND FOREMOST LEGAL ISSUE THAT THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT FRAMED ON 28.12.2014 IS AN INVALID ONE ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY U/S. 151(2) OF THE ACT HAD NOT GRANTED THE NECESSARY SANCTION TO THE CORRESPONDING REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . THIS ISSUE ADMITTEDLY GOES T O THE ROOT OF THE MATTER. WE THEREFORE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE ASSESSEE'S FOREGOING LEGAL GROUND AT THIS STAGE. A FEW RELEVANT FACTS MAY BE NOTICED. 3. THIS ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY MANUFACTURING GRANITE SLABS. IT HAD FILED ITS R ETURN OF I NCOME O N 22.09.2009. THIS FOLLOW ED THE ASSESSING OFFICERS SECTION 143(3) REGULAR ASSESSMENT FRAMED ON 5.12.2011 AND HIS 154 RECTIFICATION NOTICE ISSUED ON 2.12.2012. CASE R ECORDS INDICATE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER FORMED REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT TH E ASSESSEE'S TAXABLE INCOME LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. HE THUS ISSUED 148 NOTICE 3 ITA NO. 887/HYD/2015 & C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 DT.10.03.2014 I.E. WELL BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR COMING TO 31.03.2014. THE SAME CULMINATED IN SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 REASSESSMENT DT.28.12.2014 AS UPHELD IN THE CIT(A)S ORDER. HERE COMES THE ISSUE BETWEEN THE PARTIES. 4. THE ASSESSEE'S CASE BEFORE US IS THAT IT WAS THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2), HYDERABAD WHO HAD ISSUED SECTION 148 NOTICE DATED 1 0.3.2014 (PAGE 39). AND THAT THE SAID NOTICE HAD B EEN ISSUED AFTER THE NECESSRY SATISFACTION OF THE CIT - 1, HYDERABAD THIS CLINCHING FACT HAS GONE UNREBUTTED FROM THE DEPARTMENTS SIDE. WE THEREFORE QUOTE 151 OF THE ACT AT THIS STAGE PRESCRIBING THE F OLLOWING CONDITIONS : 151 SANCTION FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE (1) NO NOTICE SHALL BE ISSUED U/S.148 BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER, AFTER THE EXPIRY OF A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, UNLESS THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR C HIEF COMMISSIONE R OR PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED, ON THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR THE ISSUE OF SUCH NOTICE. 4 ITA NO. 887/HYD/2015 & C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 (2) IN A CASE OTHER THAN A CASE FALLING UNDER SUB - SECTION(1), NO NOTICE SHALL BE ISSUED U/S. 148 BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO IS BELOW THE RANK OF JOINT COMMISSIONER, UNLESS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED, ON THE REASONS RECORDED BY SUCH ASSESSING OFFICER, THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR THE ISSUE OF SUCH NOTICE. THE REVENUES CONTENTION BEFORE US REFERS TO SECTION 292B OF THE ACT THAT THE ASSESSEE I S E STOPPED FROM RAISING THE INSTANT LEGAL ISSUE. WE FIND NO MERIT SINCE THE FOREGOING STATUTORY APPLIES IN THE PRESCRIBED CIRCUMSTANCES THAN CURING THE IMPUGNED INHER ENT DEFECT . WE FURTHER MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE LEGI SLATURE HAD ITSELF US ED THE CLINCHING STATUTORY EXPRESSION UNLESS IN SECTION 151(2) OF THE ACT WHICH SUFFICIENTLY INDICATES THAT THE SATISFACTION OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER CONCERNED IN CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING RANK ED BELOW HIM, IS INDEED A MAND ATORY CONDITION ONLY . WE WISH TO EMPHASISE THERE THAT THE HON'BLE APEX COURT S FULL BENCH DECISION IN DILIP KUMAR (2018) 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) HAS SETTLED THE LAW THAT THE PROVISIONS OF A TAXING STATUTE HA VE TO BE INTERPRETED IN STRICTER MANNER ONLY . WE 5 ITA NO. 887/HYD/2015 & C.O. NO.59/HYD/2015 THE REFORE ADOPT THE VERY ANALOGY HEREIN AS WELL TO HOLD THAT THE IMPUGNED REOPENING IS NON - EST IN THE EYES OF LAW . ALL OTHER PLEADINGS ON MERITS ARE RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS. 5. TO SUM UP, REVENUES APPEAL 887/HYD/2015 IS DISMISSED AND ASSESSEE'S C .O. NO.59/HYD/2015 IS ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. A COPY OF THIS COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN RESPECTIVE CASE FILES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17TH SEPT . , 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (L .P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DT. 17 .0 9 .2021. * REDDY GP COPY TO : 1. M/S. DIVYASHAKTI GRANITES LIMITED, 7 - 1 - 58, DIVYA SHAKTI COMPLEX, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD. 2. DCIT, CIRCLE 17(1), HYDERABAD. 3. ADDL. C I T , RANGE 17, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS) - 5, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, HYDERABAD.