Shreyasi Dharmen Sutaria, Ahmedabad V. ACIT, Central Circle-(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 278/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0921 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRENDRA OJHA
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3); 153C; 132

Judgement Text

, A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.278/AHD/2018 / ASSTT.YEAR : 2011-12 SHREYAS I DHARMEN SU TARIA 8, AMRASAGUN BUNGALOWS NR.HATHISING PARK SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD 380015. PAN : AWOPS 1881 R VS. ACIT, CENT.CIR.1 (2) AHMEDABAD. IT(SS)A NO.279/AHD/2018 / ASSTT.YEAR : 2011-12 SHRENA SANJAY SUTARIA 8, AMRASAGUN BUNGALOWS NR.HATHISING PARK SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD 380015. PAN : ASQPS 7606 E VS. ACIT, CENT.CIR.1(2) AHMEDABAD. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NUPUR SHAH, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI VIRENDRA OJHA, CIT-DR / DATE OF HEARING : 03/03/2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04/03/2021 !'/ O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT: PRESENT TWO APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEES AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A)-11, AHMEDA BAD OF EVEN DATED I.E. 2.8.2018 PASSED ON THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS OF T HE APPELLANTS IN THE ASSTT.YEAR 2011-12. IT(SS)A NO.278 AND 279/AHD/2018 2 2. BOTH THE APPELLANTS HAVE RAISED A COMMON GRIEVAN CE VIZ. NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 19 61 WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 153C READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT IN THE RESPECTIVE CASES OF THE APPELLANTS DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 3. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SU BMITTED THAT A SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF ATUL HIRALAL SHAH, ANIL HIRALAL SHAH AN D JIGNESH HIRALAL SHAH ON 4.12.2014. ACCORDING TO THE AO, SHRI ATUL HIRALAL SHAH AND ANIL HIRALAL SHAH WERE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF P ROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THEREFORE, AFTER AN ANALYSIS OF CASH BOOKS AND OTHER DETAILS AT THEIR PREMISES, IT WAS CONSTRUED T HAT PRESENT TWO ASSESSEES HAVE ALSO AVAILED BENEFIT OF SUCH ENTRIES , AND INFORMATION GATHERED FROM THE SEIZED MATERIAL OF THE SEARCHED P ERSON, WHICH INDICATED THAT SUCH INFORMATION PERTAINS TO OR RELA TES TO THESE TWO ASSESSEES. ACCORDINGLY, ACTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT HAS TAKEN AGAINST THE PRESENT ASSESSEES. 4. DISSATISFIED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS, BOTH TH E ASSESSEES WENT IN APPEALS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. T HEY HAVE CHALLENGED JURISDICTION OF THE AO ASSUMED UNDER SECTION 153C O F THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT REQUISITE ADDITION CONTEMPLATED UNDER T HIS SECTION ARE NOT AVAILABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, NO ACTIO N UNDER SECTION 153C OUGHT TO BE TAKEN, AND THEREFORE, LEGAL GROUNDS HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE LD.CIT(A). HOWEVER, ADDITIONS MADE WERE DELETE D ON MERIT FROM THE HANDS OF BOTH THE PARTIES. IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT AGAINST IT(SS)A NO.278 AND 279/AHD/2018 3 ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) REVENUE HAS ALSO COME UP IN APPEAL, AND ITS APPEALS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT TAX EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF RELIEF GIVEN BY THE LD.CIT(A) WAS LESS THAN THE MON ETARY LIMIT FOR CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN BOTH THE CASES. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES HAS REITERATED HER CONTENTIONS AS RAISED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.CIT- DR PUT RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 6. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, WE HAVE CONFRONTED THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY RECORD A FINDING WHICH O THERWISE ACADEMIC IN NATURE, BECAUSE THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO STA NDS DELETED BY THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON MERIT. THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) IN BOTH THE CASES HAVE ATTAINED FINALITY AS THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE WERE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THEM. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS A LEGAL GROUND, AND IF IT IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER WOULD BE QUASHED. SHE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE LARG E NUMBERS OF CASES OF THE SAME GROUP. 7. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE ASPECTS, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO NECESSITY TO RECORD ANY FINDING, W HICH OTHERWISE NOT GOING TO MATERIALLY AFFECT THE ASSESSEE. IT WILL B E PURELY AN ACADEMIC ISSUE. THERE IS NO TAX LIABILITY IN THE HANDS OF T HE ASSESSEE BY VIRTUE OF TAKING COGNIZANCE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. W HATEVER TAX LIABILITY FASTENED IN THE HANDS OF BOTH THE ASSESSE E BY THE AO IS CONCERNED, THAT STANDS ELIMINATED BY VIRTUE OF ORDE R OF THE LD.CIT(A), IT(SS)A NO.278 AND 279/AHD/2018 4 AND THOSE ORDERS HAVE ATTAINED FINALITY. THE LD.CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT SINCE IN THE SATISFACTION NOTE R ECORDED BY THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON DEPICTS THAT HE MADE REFERENCE TO THE INFORMATION WHICH PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, THE ASSESS MENT ORDERS INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE CONCERNED, IN T HOSE YEARS INFORMATION SHOULD BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHE R WORDS, SOME DOCUMENTS OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN RECOVERED WHICH BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE, ONLY THEREAFTER, COGNIZANCE CAN BE TAKEN UNDER SECT ION 153C. SHE MADE REFERENCE TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ANIL KUMAR GOPI KRISHNA AGARWAL VS.ACIT (GU JARAT), (2019) 418 ITR 25. NO DOUBT THE ASSESSEE MIGHT HAVE A STR ONG CASE PRIMA FACIE , BUT IN THAT CASE, WE WOULD REQUIRE TO LOOK INTO T HE ORIGINAL RECORDS FOR ASCERTAINING INFORMATION POSSESSED BY T HE AO WHILE CONFIRMING THE INFORMATION FOR TAKING COGNIZANCE UN DER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. IT WOULD BE FUTILE EXERCISE BECAUSE AG AIN THERE WILL NOT BE ANY TAX IMPLICATION. THEREFORE, WE DEEM IT APPROPR IATE TO OBSERVE AS THAT - AT THIS STAGE, WE DO NOT WISH TO INDULGE IN ACADEMI C DISCUSSION ON THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEES IN APPEALS. H OWEVER, IN CASE, IN FUTURE SOME MISC.APPLICATION OR OTHERWISE, APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE REVIVED OR RESTORED TO THEIR ORIGINAL NUMBERS, THEN BOTH THE ASSESSEES WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO RAISE THIS PRELIMIN ARY GROUND IN THEIR RESPECTIVE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN SHAPE OF CROSS OBJECTION. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT OUR NON-ADJUDICATION AND NON- CONSIDERATION OF THIS ISSUE ON MERIT WILL NOT CAUSE OR PREJUDICE TO THE ASSESSEES OR OTHER IT(SS)A NO.278 AND 279/AHD/2018 5 ASSESSEES OF THIS GROUP IN THEIR RESPECTIVE APPEALS . WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE BOTH APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 4 TH MARCH, 2021 AT AHMEDABAD. S D / - (PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S D / - (RAJPAL YADAV) VICE-PRESIDENT