Platina Properties & Projects Ltd., Hyderabad V. ACIT, Hyderabad

ITA 907/HYD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5925 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-02-2010
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VASUNDHARA SINHA
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHAN RAO
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Additional evidence; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR ITA NO.907/HYD/09 : ASSTT . YEAR 2002-03 M/S. PLATINA PROPERTIES & PROJECTS LTD., HYDERABAD. ( PAN AACCP 8484 G) V/S. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.MURALI MOHAN RAO RESPONDENT BY : SMT. VASUNDHARA SINHA O R D E R PER G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002- 03 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 261 DAYS IN THE FILING OF TH E PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATI ON FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONGWITH AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINI NG THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN PREFERRING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES ON THE ISSUE OF DELAY. WE FIND THAT THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS FIL ED AN AFFIDAVIT BEFORE US, STATING THAT APPELLATE ORDER PA SSED BY THE CIT(A) WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE'S REPRESENTATIVE AND WAS SENT TO T HE OFFICE ITA NO.907/HYD/09 M/S.PLATINA PROPERTIES & PROJECTS LTD., HYD. 2 OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, AND THE SAID ORDER WAS RECEIVED BY A CLERK, SHRI HANUMANTH RAO, WHO MISPLACED THE SAME. THE APPEA L PAPERS WERE LOCATED LATER ON, AND A DECISION FOR FILING OF T HE APPEAL COULD BE ARRIVED AT ONLY THEREAFTER, LEADING TO THE DELAY IN THE FILING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL, WHICH IS THUS, FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASONS. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFF ICIENT REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS ACCORDINGLY CONDONED. 4. THOUGH ELABORATE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NUMBERING AS MANY AS FIVE AND RUNNING INTO TWO COMPLETE PAGES, HAVE BEE N FILED, EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 , WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER= 'THE HONOURABLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS -I HAS ERRED WHILE CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN THE A.O. HAS ADDED BACK AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,40,95,444/- TOWARD S DISALLOWANCE OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES WHICH IS NOT CORRECT AND NO T JUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. HENCE, THE ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. ' 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY MERELY OBSERVING THAT NO DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AND NO EVIDENCE FOR THE EXPENDITURE WAS ALSO GIVEN. HE SUBMITTED THAT NECESSARY DETAILS HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL, WHICH MAY BE ADMITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT SUBMITTING THE NECESSARY DETAI LS IN SUPPORT OF THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM FOR PROFESSIONAL CHARGES, AS THE ASSE SSEE'S PREMISES WERE SEARCHED BY THE DEPARTMENT, AND THEREAFTE R AS MANY AS 550 ASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE PASSED, WHICH RESULTED IN 400 A PPEALS ITA NO.907/HYD/09 M/S.PLATINA PROPERTIES & PROJECTS LTD., HYD. 3 TO BE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSE E COULD NOT FILE THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM . 6. THE LEARNED CIT-DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION F OR THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE REQUISITE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER OR THE CIT(A) IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF PROFESSIO NAL CHARGES. SHE SUBMITTED THAT AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES WAS GIVEN TO TH E ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD . SHE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V/S. SAS EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY (319 ITR 65)-P&H. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WITH REGAR D TO ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF DETAI LS IN SUPPORT OF THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES. WE FIN D THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABNORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSESSEE'S CASE, WH EREIN SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS WERE CONDUCTED, AND 550 ASSE SSMENT ORDERS ARE STATED TO HAVE BEEN FRAMED BY THE DEPARTM ENT, ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH ASSESSEE HAS TO PREPARE FOR 400 APPEALS BEFORE TH E CIT(A), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IT SHALL BE IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE TO PROVIDE THE ASSESSEE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF PROFE SSIONAL CHARGES CLAIMED BY IT. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ADMIT T HE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUG NED ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON THIS ISSUE, SET ASIDE THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE DE NOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTU NITY OF HEARING ITA NO.907/HYD/09 M/S.PLATINA PROPERTIES & PROJECTS LTD., HYD. 4 TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE NECE SSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM FOR D EDUCTION OF PROFESSIONAL CHARGES. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5.3.2010 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (G.C.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DT/- 5TH MARCH, 2010 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. M/S. PLATINA PROPERTIES & PROJECTS LTD.(HYDERAB AD) C/O. M/S. P. MURALI & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 6-3- 6755/2/3,. 1ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD-82 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 5, HYDERABAD. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) I, HYDERABAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S.