ACIT, Jaipur V. JAGDISH KPRASAD SONI, Jaipur

ITA 912/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5554 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRITHVIRAJ MEENAADDL CIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: SITARAM SHARMA
• Section: 10AA

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS [KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 912/JP/16 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR CUKE VS. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI, 4088 TOP KHANE KA RASTA, CHANDPOLE BAZAR, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AHNPS 6614E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 913/JP/16 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR CUKE VS. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI, 4088 TOP KHANE KA RASTA, CHANDPOLE BAZAR, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AHNPS 6614E VIHYKFKHZ / APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SITARAM SHARMA (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI PRITHVIRAJ MEENA,(ADDL. CIT ) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27.02.2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28/02/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (APPEAL)-I, JAIPUR DATED 11.08.2016 AND 31.08.2016 FOR A.Y. 2012-13 AND 2013- 14 RESPECTIVELY. THE SOLE GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVEN UE IS AS UNDER: ITA NOS. 912 & 913/JP/16 ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR VS. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI 2 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF RS. 56,40,707/- FOR A.Y. 2012-13 AND RS. 53,23,134/- FOR A.Y 2013-1 4 ON ACCOUNT OF DEDUCTION U/S 10AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IGNO RING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FULFIL THE MANDATORY CONDITION P RESCRIBED U/S 10AA(4)(II) OF THE IT ACT AS THE BUSINESS WAS FORME D BY RECONSTRUCTION OF OLD UNIT WHICH WAS HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN IN THE S AME TRADE OF BUSINESS. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE MAT TER IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH IN ITA NO. 642/JP/10 DATED 29.04.2011 FOR A.Y. 2007-08, ITA NO . 424/JP/12 DATED 26.02.2014 FOR A.Y 2008-09 AND 2009-10, IN ITA NO.6 71/JP/13 FOR A.Y. 2010-11 DATED 24.11.2015 AND IN ITA NO. 754/JP/14 AND 780/J P/14 DATED 27.05.2016. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS NOT BR OUGHT ANY NEW FACT ON RECORD IN THIS SUBJECT YEAR BUT HAS REPEATED HE FIN DINGS RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2007-08. IN VIEW OF THAT , THE EARLIER ORDERS OF THE HONBLE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE SHOULD BE FOLLO WED AND NECESSARY RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE COORDINATE BENCH IN ITS ORDER DATED 29.04.20 11 (ITA NO. 642/JP/10) HAS GIVEN ITS DETAILED FINDINGS AT PARA 4.4 TO 4.9 OF ITS ORDER WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH HAD ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE U/S 10AA OF THE ACT WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. 4. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. THE LD. DR ALSO BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE BENCH THAT THE DE PARTMENT HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN TH E SUBJECT MATTER IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND APPEAL HAS BEEN ADMITTED BEFORE T HE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT. ITA NOS. 912 & 913/JP/16 ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR VS. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI 3 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. UNDISPUTEDLY, THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OR IN THE LEGAL POSITION BY VIRTUE OF WHIC H THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 10AA HAS BEEN DISALLOWED BY THE A.O IN THIS YEAR AN D IN THE EARLIER YEARS. IN RESPECT OF EARLIER YEARS WHEREIN THE MATTER HAS BE EN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE COORDINATE BENCHES, THOUGH APPEALS HAVE BEEN ADMITTED BY THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, IT WAS INFORMED A T THE BAR THAT THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT WHILE ADMITTING THE APPEALS FI LED BY THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT STAYED THE OPERATION OF THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCHES EARLIER. IN LIGHT OF ABOVE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES, WE DO NOT SEE ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION U/S 10AA OF THE ACT. IN THE RESULT THE G ROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CON SIDERATION. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN B OTH THE YEARS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/02 /2017. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 28/02/2017 VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR ITA NOS. 912 & 913/JP/16 ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR VS. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI 4 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SONI, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT I, JAIPUR 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A) I, JAIPUR 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.912 & 913/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR.