Shri Dahyabhai Prahladbhai Patel, Kadi V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 583/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0857 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANKARLAL MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY RANJAN
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER (SS) ./ I.T(SS).A. NO.583/AHD/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL 71/72, SARDAR SOCIETY NR.BHANUPURA KADI 382 715 / VS. THE ASST.CIT CENT.CIRCLE-1(4) AHMEDABAD ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : PAN:ABUPP 4535 A ( ' / APPELLANT ) .. ( #' / RESPONDENT ) ' $ / APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIJAY RANJAN, AR #' % $ / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHANKAR LAL MEENA,CIT-DR &'( % ) / DATE OF HEARING 16/07/2015 *+, % ) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 27/08/2015 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-I, AHMEDABAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 12/08/2011 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR (AY) 2008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL:- GROUNDS OF APPEAL (WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER) IT(SS)A NO.583 /AHD/2011 DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - 1. IN LAW AND IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE ASSESSEE'S PLEA THAT IT WAS NOT AT AL L A FIT CASE FOR INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A AND HE FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 153A, DATED 21 ST DECEMBER, 2010. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE REALIZED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN EMBARKING UPON THE PROCESSING AND SCRUTINY OF THE ASSESSMENT IN A FASHION WHICH WAS PERMISSIBLE IN A REGULAR ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER SECTION 153A/153C. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE HELD THAT IN AN ASSESSMENT MADE IN PURSUANCE OF SECTION 153A, NONE OF THE TWO ADJUSTME NTS MADE IN THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER WERE REQUIRED TO BE MADE. 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF CAR EXPENS ES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SAFEGUARDING AND ENHANCING HIS SHARE OF INCOME FROM THE FIRM(S) IN WHICH HE WAS A PARTNER. 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING ASSESSING OFFICER'S PRESUMPTION THAT SOME EXPENDITURE ON AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS WAS INCURRED OVER AND ABOVE THE EXPENDITURE SHOWN IN THE ACCOUNTS AND HE FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE PRES UMPTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT SUCH DIFFERENCE IN EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED FR OM ASSESSEE'S INCOME WHICH WAS LIABLE TO TAX AND HE FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING AN ADDITION OF RS.10,258 AS IN FACT IT CANNOT BE MADE EVEN UNDER SECTION 69C. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE IN REGARD TO INTERE ST UNDER SECTION 234B. 8. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AM END AND/OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUND OR GROUNDS EITHER BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARI NG OF THE APPEAL. IT(SS)A NO.583 /AHD/2011 DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT A SEARCH U/S.132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE CASE OF RAJA GROUP OF KADI, DIST.MEHSANA ON 05/02/2009. A WARRANT OF AUTHORIZATION U/S.132 WAS ALSO ISSUED TO THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, A NOTICE U/S.153A WAS ISSUED ON 17/08/ 2009 BY THE AO AND IN RESPONSE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF I NCOME ON 04/12/2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.15,40,160/-. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER (AO IN SHORT) FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 21/12/2010; THEREBY THE AO MADE ADDITION OF R S.1,22,680/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE BEING PERSON AL IN NATURE AND ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS.56,545/- ON ACCOUNT OF THE EXPE NDITURE TOWARDS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE AO ALSO MADE ADDITION IN R ESPECT OF UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF RS.2,70,000/-. THE ASSESSEE FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FOR AY 2008-09. WHILE ALLOWING THE APPEAL, THE LD.CIT( A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.2,70,000/- AND RESTRICTED THE ADDITI ON TO RS.10,258/- AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE S UBMISSIONS AS WERE MADE IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS-CUM-SYNOPSIS. IT(SS)A NO.583 /AHD/2011 DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 4 - 3.1. ON THE CONTRARY, LD.CIT-DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER S OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. GROUND NOS.1 TO 4 ARE INTER-CONNECTED, THEREFOR E THE SAME ARE DECIDED TOGETHER. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD.COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED THAT IN THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR PROCEEDINGS U /S.143(3) WERE ABATED. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH (SPECIAL BENCH) RENDERED IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO G LOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-44, REPORTED AT (2012) 2 3 TAXMANN.COM 103(MUM.)(SB)::137 ITD 287, DATED 06/07/2012, GROUN D NOS.1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ARE REJECTED. 5. GROUND NO.5 IS NOT PRESSED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.CIT-DR HAS NO OBJECTION. IN VIEW OF THE STA TEMENT MADE BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, GROUND NO.5 OF ASSESSE ES APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6. GROUND NO.6 IS UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.10,2 58/-. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED IN THIS GROUND, HE DOES NOT WISH TO PRESS THE SAME. THE CIT-DR HAS NO OBJECTION. IN V IEW OF THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, GROUND NO. 6 IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. IT(SS)A NO.583 /AHD/2011 DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 5 - 7. GROUND NOS. 7 & 8 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE WHICH RE QUIRE NO INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATION. 14. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON THURSDAY, THE 27 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 27/ 08 /2015 0)..& , '.&../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#$%&' &$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT 2. #' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 123 4 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 4 ( ) / THE CIT(A)-I, AHMEDABAD 5. 5'6 &23 , ) 23 , , 1 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 689 :( / GUARD FILE. ! / BY ORDER, #5 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 20.8.15(DICTATION-PAD 5+ PAG ES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ..24.8.15 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.27.8.15 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 27.8.15 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER