DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, Kolkata V. M/s Epoch Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITSSA 68/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3412 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G HANGSHING
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH TIWARI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

1 I.T(SS).A. NOS. 68-72/KOL/2016 EPOCH MERCANTILES (P) LTD., AYS. 07-08 TO 11 -12 , B , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: KOL KATA ( ) BEFORE . . , /AND . , ) [BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM] I.T(SS).A. NOS. 68 TO 72/KOL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 TO 2011-12 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA. VS. M/S. EPOCH MERCANTILES (P) LTD. (PAN: AAACE7084M) APPELLANT RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING 24.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02.08.2017 FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI G. HANGSHING, CIT (DR) FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI MANISH TIWARI, FCA ORDER PER BENCH THESE ARE 5 APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 28.06.2016 FOR AYS. 2007-08 TO 2011-12. THE SOLE I SSUE IN THESE FIVE APPEALS IS IDENTICAL WITH VARIANCE IN FIGURES WHICH IS EXTRACTED BELOW F OR READY REFERENCE: AY: 2007-08 SUBSTANTIAL POINT OF LAW IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CA SE BUT THE OVERALL TAX EFFECT IS RS.49,78,621/- WHICH IS ABOVE THE THRESHOLD LIMIT S PECIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR VIDE 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. HENCE, FURTHER APPEAL IN THIS CASE IS SUGGESTED. AY: 2008-09 SUBSTANTIAL POINT OF LAW IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CA SE BUT THE OVERALL TAX EFFECT IS RS.85,33,144/- WHICH IS ABOVE THE THRESHOLD LIMIT S PECIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR VIDE 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. HENCE, FURTHER APPEAL IN THIS CASE IS SUGGESTED. AY: 2009-10 SUBSTANTIAL POINT OF LAW IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CA SE BUT THE OVERALL TAX EFFECT IS RS.26,1466/- WHICH IS ABOVE THE THRESHOLD LIMIT SPECIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR VIDE 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. HENCE, FURTHER APPEAL IN THIS CASE IS SUGGESTED. 2 I.T(SS).A. NOS. 68-72/KOL/2016 EPOCH MERCANTILES (P) LTD., AYS. 07-08 TO 11 -12 AY: 2010-11 SUBSTANTIAL POINT OF LAW IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CA SE BUT THE OVERALL TAX EFFECT IS RS.34,78,731/- WHICH IS ABOVE THE THRESHOLD LIMIT S PECIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR VIDE 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. HENCE, FURTHER APPEAL IN THIS CASE IS SUGGESTED. AY: 2011-12 SUBSTANTIAL POINT OF LAW IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CA SE BUT THE OVERALL TAX EFFECT IS RS.55,26,750/- WHICH IS ABOVE THE THRESHOLD LIMIT S PECIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR VIDE 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015. HENCE, FURTHER APPEAL IN THIS CASE IS SUGGESTED. 2. AT THE OUTSET ITSELF, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT SIMILAR GROUNDS WERE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN IT(SS )A NO.73 TO 75/KOL/2016 IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. M/S. KALYANKARI AGROTECH (P) LTD. WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL C BENCH TAKING NOTE OF THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OPINED THAT THERE IS TOTA L NON-APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE AUTHORITIES WHILE FILING THE APPEAL. WE NOTE THAT IN THE INSTA NT CASE BEFORE US ALSO, THE LD. CIT, DR COULD NOT GIVE ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT GROUNDS O F APPEAL THE REVENUE INTENDS TO ASSAIL BEFORE US. WE CONCUR WITH THE OBSERVATION OF THE T RIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. KALYANKARI AGROTECH (P) LTD., SUPRA THAT THERE IS NO APPLICATI ON OF MIND WHILE FILING THE INSTANT APPEALS. THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT CARED EVEN TO FILE ANY REVIS ED GROUNDS. IN SUCH A SCENARIO, WE HAVE NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL PREF ERRED BY THE REVENUE. ON MERITS, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT WHEREIN THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT HAS ACCE PTED AFTER DUE VERIFICATION THE EXISTENCE AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE COMPANIES WHICH HAS ADV ANCED AMOUNTS TO THE ASSESSEE. HE RELIED ON THE REMAND REPORT GIVEN BY THE AO AND SUB MITTED THAT ON MERITS THE AO HAS NO GROUND TO FILE THIS INSTANT APPEAL. WE ARE NOT IN CLINED TO COMMENT ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE AS SUCH. HOWEVER, TAKING NOTE OF THE GROUNDS OF APP EAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE, WE ARE INCLINED NOT TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME BECAUSE WE DO N OT FIND ANY ATTEMPT MADE BY THE REVENUE TO CHALLENGE THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A). IN SU CH A SCENARIO, WE HAVE NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DISMISS THE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE AR E DISMISSED. 4. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.08.2 017 SD/- SD/- (M. BALAGANESH) (ABY. T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 ND AUGUST, 2017 JD.(SR.P.S.) 3 I.T(SS).A. NOS. 68-72/KOL/2016 EPOCH MERCANTILES (P) LTD., AYS. 07-08 TO 11 -12 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA. 2 RESPONDENT M/S. EPOCH MERCANTILES (P) LTD., ROO M NO. 5, TOBACCO HOUSE, 1, OLD COURT HOUSE CORNER, KOLKATA-700 001. 3. THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. CIT , KOLKATA. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SR. PVT. SECRETARY