DCIT, Thrissur V. Shri K. Veeramani, Thrissur

ITSSA 43/COCH/2006

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8966 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-09-2010
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2006
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S C SONKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R KRISHNA IYER
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Block assessment
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI N.VIJAYAKUMARAN & SHRI SANJAY ARORA I.T (S&S) .A.NO. 43 /COCH/200 6 BLOCK PERIOD:1 - 4 - 19 89 TO 28 - 9 - 1998 THE DY . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR. VS. SHRI K. VE ERAMANI, THRISSUR. (APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY SHRI S.C.SONKAR, CIT.,DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI R. KRISHNA IYER, CA O R D E R PER N.VIJAYAKUMARAN,J.M: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-I, KOCHI DATED 20-02- 2006. 2. THE EFFECTIVE GROUND URGED BY THE REVENUE READS AS FOLLOWS: THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITIO N OF RS.2,80,120/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD P AID ADVANCE TAX AND SELF ASSESSMENT TAX WITHOUT TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BB OF TH E I.T.ACT. IT(S&S)A NO. 43/COCH/2006 SHRI K. VEERAMANI, THRISSUR. 2 3. THE FACTS RELEVANT ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN I NDIVIDUAL AND DEALER IN CEMENT AND ALSO PRODUCTS OF HINDUSTAN LEVER. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH U/S.132 AT THE RESIDENC E OF ONE SMT. THANKAMANI AMMA ON 28-9-1998, A DOCUMENT SHOWI NG PAYMENT OF MONEY BY SHRI K. VEERAMANI TO SHRI SHRI C.N. BALAKRISHNAN, HUSBAND OF SMT. THANKAMANI AMMA WAS SEIZED. THIS INDICATED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE U/S.158BC R.W.S.158BD OF THE ACT FOR THE BLO CK PERIOD 01-04-1989 TO 28-09-1998. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, ASSESSEE FILED 2B RETURN DISCLOSING NIL INCOME. ON THE DATE OF SEARCH ITSELF, THE ASSESSEE WAS EXAMINED U/S.131 OF THE ACT AND IN HIS STATEMENT, ASSESSEE CONFIRMED THE PA YMENT OF RS.20 LAKHS TO SHRI C.N.BALAKRISHNAN. HE EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF PAYMENT AS WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCO UNTS. 4. HOWEVER, WHILE COMPUTING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME, SOME MISTAKE WAS CREPT IN. THEREFORE, ASSESSING O FFICER INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 AND ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,80,120/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 UN DER THE HEAD CREDIT WRONGLY GIVEN FOR P.Y.1997-98 AYU 199 8-99, AS THE RETURN FILED AFTER THE DATE OF SEARCH EVEN T HOUGH IT IT(S&S)A NO. 43/COCH/2006 SHRI K. VEERAMANI, THRISSUR. 3 WAS DUE ON 31-8-1998. IN THAT WAY, THIS ADDITION WAS MADE. 5. ON APPEAL TO THE CIT(APPEALS), THE LD. CIT(APPEA LS) FOUND THAT THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT MADE U/S.158BC R.W.S.158BD WAS DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) VID E APPEAL NO.R-106/02-03 DATED 3-9-2004. ACCORDING TO THE L D. CIT(APPEALS) THERE REMAINS NO UNDISCLOSED INCOME BU T FOR THE RECTIFICATION ORDER U/S.154 DATED 23-11-2005. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FURTHER REINFORCED HIS FINDINGS BY OB SERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID ADVANCE TAX . HENCE, TH E INCOME IS COVERED AND ALSO ENTERED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, BY RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF DR. MRS. ALKA GOSWANI VS. CIT (2004) 268 ITR 178 WHEREIN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT THE INCOME DISCLOSED ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME, TH E LD. CIT(APPEALS) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.2,80,120/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE PRE CEDENTS IT(S&S)A NO. 43/COCH/2006 SHRI K. VEERAMANI, THRISSUR. 4 RELIED UPON. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY RELYI NG ON THE DECISION RENDERED IN THE CASE OF DR. MRS. ALKA GOSWANI VS. CIT (2004) 268 ITR 178. THAT BEING THE POSITION, WHICH IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTERFERENCE IS WARRANTED. HENCE, WE REJECT THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DR AND DECID E THE ISSUE AGAINST THE REVENUE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSE SSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.VIJAYKUMA RA N) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER ERNAKULAM, DATED THE 17 TH SEPTEMBER,2010. PM. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE , THRISSUR. 2. SHRI K. VEERAMANI, CEMENT DEALER, JYOTHI, WEST FORT , ARANATTUKARA,THRISSUR. 3. CIT(A)-I, KOCHI. 4. CIT, CENTRAL, KOCHI. 5. D.R.