INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-2, ALWAR V. SMT. RAINA JALAN, GURGAON, HARYANA

ITA 935/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4808 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR ASHWINI HOSMANI
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148; 154

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 FOT; IKY JKO ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 935/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), ALWAR. CUKE VS. SMT. RAINA JALAN, 318-A, DLF PHASE-4, HAMILTON COURT, GURGAON, HARYANA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABPPJ 4772 N VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : DR. ASHWINI HOSMANI (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF HEARING: 16/10/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/10/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/05/2018 OF LD. CIT(A), ALWAR ARISING FROM THE ORDER PASSED U/S 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) FOR THE A.Y. 2008- 09. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL, WHICH IS AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234A OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT DOES N OT SURVIVE, SINCE THE ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS HELD I NVALID. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) READ WIT H SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WAS COMPLETED ON 29/1/2016 AT THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 7,22,150/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER PROPOSED TO RECT IFY THE SAID ORDER BY 2 ITA NO. 935/JP/2018 ITO VS RAINA JALAN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 OF THE ACT I N RESPECT OF THE INTEREST U/S 234A(2) OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS SHORT CHARGED AT RS. 5,208/- INSTEAD OF RS. 57,926/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCORDINGLY, PA SSED AN ORDER U/S 154 OF THE ACT ON 06/4/2017 WHEREBY LEVIED THE INTEREST U/S 234A(1) AT RS. 57,926/- AND THEREBY ENHANCED THE INTEREST BY RS. 5 2,718/-. 3. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO HAD DELETED THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234A OF THE ACT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ORD ER U/S 154 OF THE ACT. 4. BEFORE US, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS RECTIFIED THE MISTAKE U/S 154 OF THE ACT AS THE INT EREST U/S 234A OF THE ACT WAS TO BE CHARGED FROM AUGUST, 2008 TO DECEMBER, 20 15, WHICH COMES TO RS. 57,926/-, HOWEVER, MISTAKENLY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER CHARGED INTEREST U/S 234A OF THE ACT OF RS. 5,208/- WHILE PASSING TH E REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29/1/2016. THUS, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER U/S 154 OF THE ACT IS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF RECTIFICATION O F MISTAKE. 5. HOWEVER, AT THE OUTSET WE NOTE THAT THE LD. CIT( A) HAS ALREADY QUASHED THE REASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) RE AD WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 01/12/2017. THE SAID OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CHALLENGED BY THE REVENUE, HOWEVER, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28/8/20 18. THEREFORE, ONCE 3 ITA NO. 935/JP/2018 ITO VS RAINA JALAN THE REASSESSMENT ORDER WAS QUASHED THEN THE CONSEQU ENTIAL LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234A OF THE ACT DOES NOT ARISE. 6. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS REL EVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD WE NOTE THAT THE REASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT DATED 29/1/2016 WAS QUASHED/SET ASIDE BY THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATE D 01/12/2017 AS THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS HE LD TO BE INVALID. THE SAID DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CHALLENGED BY THE RE VENUE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, HOWEVER, SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPE AL OF THE REVENUE WAS LESS THAN THE LIMIT OF RS. 20.00 LACS, THEREFORE, T HE SAID APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28/8/201 8. ACCORDINGLY, ONCE THE REASSESSMENT ITSELF WAS QUASHED THEN THE INTERE ST LEVIED U/S 234A OF THE ACT ON THE ASSESSED INCOME WOULD NOT SURVIVE. T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN PARA 5.3 AS UNDER: 5.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. AND SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE APPELLANT. SINCE THE ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS HELD INVALID AS PER THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 01/12/2017 , THEREFORE, THE INTEREST LEVIED U/S 234A OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT DOES NOT SURVIVE. ACCORDINGL Y, THE APPELLANTS GROUND OF APPEAL ON THE ISSUE IS ALLOWED. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHERE THE REASSESSMENT ITSELF WAS QUASHED THEN THE LEVY OF IN TEREST U/S 234A(1) OF 4 ITA NO. 935/JP/2018 ITO VS RAINA JALAN THE ACT DOES NOT ARISE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23/10/2018 SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 23 RD OCTOBER, 2018 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT - THE ITO, WARD 2(2), ALWAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT - SMT. RAINA JALAN, GURGAON, HARYANA. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K]T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 935/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR