I.T.O Wd - 3(4),kolkata., Kolkata V. M/s Palpit Viniyog (P) Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 975/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9559 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 09-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA (BENCH - C) BEFORE SRI ABY T.VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO. 975/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 - 07 FOR THE APPELLANT NONE (DR) FOR THE RESPONDENT NONE(AR) DATE OF HEARING 27.12 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13 .01.2017 ORDER PER ABY T.VARKEY , JM THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - XX , KOLKATA DATED 16.01.2013 FOR AY 2006 - 07 . 2. NONE APPEARED FOR BOTH THE PARTIES. HOWEVER, AFTER PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT WE CAN DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES. 3. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) H AS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY ADMITTING NEW EVIDENCES WITHOUT SEEKING THE REMAND REPORT AS ENVISAGED UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES 1962 (HEREINAFTER THE RULES). I.T.O WD - 3(4) KOLKATA [PAN : AACCP7714M] - VS - M/S PALPIT VINIYOG (P) LTD. KOLKATA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 ITA NO. 975/KOL/2013 M/S PALPIT VINIYOG (P) LTD. A.YR. 2006 - 07 2 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS CAREFULLY. WE NOTE THAT THE AO AFTER PERUS AL OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET OBSERVES THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM SHARE APPLICANTS AND S INCE NO DETAILS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ASSESSEE HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN TH E GARB OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND IN ORDER TO LOWER THE TAXABLE INCOME AND FOR EVADING THE TAX. THEREFORE, THE AO TREATED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSES SHARE - APPLICATION MONEY OF RS. 85,00,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED CASE CREDIT U/S 68 AND ADDED IT BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 5. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO AFTER REPRODUCING THE WRITTEN S UBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AT PAGE 2 AND 3 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER H AS NOTED THAT HE HAS GO NE THROUGH THE COPY OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2004 - 05 AND ALSO COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2004 - 05 AND HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INADVERTENTLY INSERTED A FIGURE IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE YEAR A. YR . 2006 - 07 WITH REGARD TO THE SHARE APPLICATION WHICH ARE MENTIONED AS RS. 16.50 LAKHS INSTEAD OF RS. 101.50 LAKHS AND WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE TAKE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS STATED BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT IN THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET OF THE YEAR 31.03.2006 IT WAS NOTED THAT THE SHARE APPL ICATION MONEY IS RS. 101.50 LAKHS WHERE AS IN THE LAST YEAR IT WAS WRONGLY TY PED AS RS. 16.50 LAKHS INSTEAD OF RS. 101.50 LAKH S. SO, IT SEE MS THAT THERE IS AN ENHANCEMENT OF SHARE APPLICATION OF RS. 85.00 LAKHS (RS. 101.50 LAKHS RS. 16.50 LAKHS ). 6. BE THAT AS IT MAY BE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN THE RELIEF BY GOING THROUGH THE FINANCIALS OF EARLIER YEARS AND SUBMISS IONS MADE BEFORE HIM WHICH WAS THE BASIS ON WHICH RELIEF HAS BEEN GRANTED. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT STATED AS TO WHETHER THE AO HAS ERRED IN MAKING THE ADDITION. THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS ADMITTED TO HAVE MADE A MISTAKE WHICH M UST HAVE PROMPTED THE AO TO MAKE THE ADDITION. THE AO HAS CLEARLY POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW - CAUSED AND ENQUIRED ABOUT THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 85,00,00 0 / - . B UT WHEN THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE COMPANY , THE AO HAD NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE BUT TO MAKE THE 3 ITA NO. 975/KOL/2013 M/S PALPIT VINIYOG (P) LTD. A.YR. 2006 - 07 3 ADDITION. IN SUCH A SCENARIO WITHOUT THE ASSESSEE SPELLING OUT THE FIRST CAUSE FOR NOT RESPONDING TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO , T HE LD. CIT (A) OUGHT NOT HAVE ENTERTAINED EVIDENCES AND ADMITTED THE SAME WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH RULE 46A OF THE RULES . SO, THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS A VIOLATION OF RULE 46A AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DE NOVO ASSESS AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE TO LAW. THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY IS DIRECTED TO CO - OPERATE WITH THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE C OURT ON 13 .01.2017. SD/ - SD/ - [ SHRI WASEEM AHMED ] [ A.T.VARKEY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 13 .01.2017 {SC SPS} COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. PALPIT VINIYOG (P) LTD., 293/294, BANGUR AVENUE, LAKE TOWN, KOLKATA - 95. 2.OFFICE OF THE I.T.O., WARD - 3(4 ) , P - 7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOLKATA - 69 . 3. CIT(A) - XX , KOLKATA 4. CIT XII , KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES