Smt. Madina Dawood Musa Kadva l/h of late Dawood Musa Kadva, Bharuch V. The Jt.CIT.,Cent.Circle-1, Baroda

ITSSA 105/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8348 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B K
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD , .. , '# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T(SS).A. NO.105/AHD/2007 (BLOCK PERIOD 1/4/96 TO ENDING 13.08.2002) SH.DAWOOD MUSAKADVA (DECD) SMT.MADINA DAWOOD KADVA L/H OF LATE DAWOOD MUSA KADVA KADVA STREET SHERPARA, BARUCH & & & & / VS. THE JT.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-I BARODA ' '# ./() ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AFPPK 9244 N ( '* / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( +,'* / RESPONDENT ) '* - ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE +,'* . - ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.K.S.PANDYA, CIT-DR &/ . # / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 18/09/2012 012 . # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/09/12 '3/ O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING F ROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-IV, AHMEDABAD DATED 13.02.2007 AND AS MANY AS 23 GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED. 2. IN GROUND NO.1, IT HAS ALSO BEEN INTIMATED THAT IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT AN APPLICATION WAS PENDING BEFORE SETTLEMENT COMMIS SION U/S.245C(1) OF THE I.T.ACT, BUT THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS PA SSED AN APPELLATE IT(SS)A NO.105/AH D/2007 SH.DAWOOD MUSAKADVA (DECD) L/R.SMT.MADINA DAWOOD KA DVA BLOCK PERIOD ENDING ON 13.08.2002 - 2 - ORDER DENYING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. REST OF THE GROUNDS RAISED ARE LIKE, (I) UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN CIT Y, SHOPPING CENTRE, BHARUCH, (II) UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN A PLOTS IN VILLAGE DUGRI AND MADINA PARK, (III) UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN SHOP A T SHALIMAR COMPLEX, (IV) UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN A PLOT IN BHARUCH AN D (V) UNACCOUNTED PROFIT ON SALE OF LAND, ETC. 3. AT THE OUTSET, WE HAVE NOTICED THAT A LETTER HAS BEEN MOVED FROM THE SIDE THE APPELLANT DATED 14.09.2012, WHEREIN IT IS INTIMATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE SETTLE MENT COMMISSION AND THE SAME IS DISPOSED OF BY AN ORDER U/S.245D(4) DAT ED 29.4.11. A COPY OF THIS ORDER IS ATTACHED. THE APPLICANT HAS STATE D THAT IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, MUMBAI, THE APP EAL MAY BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW. 4. FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE, LD.DR MR.B.K.S.PAN DYA, CIT-D.R. APPEARED AND PLEADED THAT HE MAY BE GRANTED SOMETIM E TO ENQUIRE THE CONSEQUENCE OF SUCH WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY THE APP ELLANT. 5. WE HAVE NOTED THAT AN ASSESSMENT U/S.158BC R.W.S . 158BG/R.W.S. 263 WAS MADE VIDE AN ORDER DATED 30.3.2006 FOR A BL OCK PERIOD OF 1.4.96 TO 13.8.2002 IN CONSEQUENCE OF A SEARCH U/S.132(1) DATED 13.8.2002 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.3,68,25,582/-. NOW BEFORE US, AN ORDER OF THE RESPECTED SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, ADDIT IONAL BENCH, MAHALAXMI CHAMBERS, MUMBAI BEARING (SETTLEMENT APPL ICATION NO.GJ/AHCC-II/126/2006-2007/IT DATED 31.01.2007) PA SSED U/S.245-D(4) DATED 29/04/2011 IS FILED. ONCE THE A PPELLANT IS KEEN TO IT(SS)A NO.105/AH D/2007 SH.DAWOOD MUSAKADVA (DECD) L/R.SMT.MADINA DAWOOD KA DVA BLOCK PERIOD ENDING ON 13.08.2002 - 3 - WITHDRAW THE APPEAL BEFORE US CONSEQUENT UPON AN OR DER PASSED U/S.245D(4) OF THE IT ACT, THEREFORE, WE FIND NO RE ASON TO KEEP THIS APPEAL ANY MORE PENDING BEFORE US WHICH WAS FILED W AY BACK IN THE YEAR 2007. WE ARE, THEREFORE NOT CONVINCED BY THE REQUE ST OF LD.DR TO FURTHER ADJOURN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT SH ALL AUTOMATICALLY ADOPT THE LEGAL RECOURSE CONSEQUENT UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPECTED SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. OTHERWISE ALSO, B Y SUO MOTU WITHDRAWAL OF THIS APPEAL BY THE APPELLANT HIMSELF SHALL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CAUSE OF THE REVENUE. WE, THEREFORE, HE REBY PERMIT THIS APPELLANT TO WITHDRAW THIS APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS ALL THE GROUNDS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( ) '# ( T.R. MEENA ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 21/ 09 /2012 ..&, .&../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS '3 . +4 5'42 '3 . +4 5'42 '3 . +4 5'42 '3 . +4 5'42/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '* / THE APPELLANT 2. +,'* / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-IV, AHMEDABAD 5. 49: +& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :;