The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad V. Shri Yasinbhai Hajisulemanbhai Qureshi, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 798/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0007 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 23-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASHANT MAHARSHI
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , , , , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A BENCH, AHMEDABAD .., ! ! ! ! ' #$, BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER !./ I.T(SS).A. NO.798/AHD/2010 ( & '& & '& & '& & '& / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) AHMEDABAD / VS. SHRI YASINBHAI HAJISULEMANBHAI QURESHI C/O.M/S.SUN AUTOMOBILES NR.SHAH WADI BUS-STOP NATIONAL HIGHWAY NO.8, NAROL AHMEDABAD ( !./)* !./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABPQ 0495 J ( (+ / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ,-(+ / RESPONDENT ) AND CO NO.335/AHD/2010 AY 2006-07 (IN IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010 AY 2006-07) SHRI YASINBHAI HAJISULEMANBHAI VS. ACIT, WARD-1(2) QURESHI, AHMEADBAD AHMEDABA D (CROSS OBJECTOR) .. (RESP ONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI SUBHASH BAINS CIT-D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI, A.R. ' . / $0 / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 30/01/2014 12' / $0 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/02/2014 3 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE BOTH HAVE FILED THE A PPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTION RESPECTIVELY AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD .COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-I, AHMEDABAD (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 16/09/2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2006-07. 2. FIRST, WE TAKE UP THE REVENUES APPEAL IN IT(SS) A NO.798/AHD/2010 FOR AY 2006-07. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING G ROUNDS OF APPEAL: IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010(BY REVENUE)& CO NO.335/AHD/2010 (BY ASSESSEE) ACIT VS. SHRI YASINBHAI HAJISULEMANBHAI QURESHI ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 2 - 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLO WING RELIEF OF RS.10,18,000/- BY DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACC OUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.U/S.69B OF THE I.T.ACT, 19 61. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3. IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT( A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEA RCH OPERATION U/S.132 WAS CONDUCTED IN QURESHI GROUP OF CASES INCLUDING IN TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 04/08/2006. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE PROCEEDINGS U/S.153 A OF THE ACT WAS INITIATED AND ASSESSMENT U/S.153A(1)(B) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS FRAMED V IDE ORDER DATED 31/12/2008, THEREBY THE ASSESSING OFFICER(AO) MADE ADDITION OF RS.21 LACS AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS, PARTLY ALLOWED T HE APPEAL, THEREBY THE LD.CIT(A) DIRECTED AO TO RESTRICT THE ADDITION U/S .69B TO RS.10,82,000/- BEING DIFFERENCE IN RECORDED SALES CONSIDERATION OF RS.9, 00,000/- AND VALUE DETERMINED BY DVO OF RS.19,82,000/-. NOW, THE REVE NUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. APROPOS TO GROUND NO.1 OF REVENUES APPEAL, THE LD.CIT-DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A ) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION. ON THE CONTRARY, LD.COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XVI, WHEREBY THE LD.CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO SALES CONSIDERATION AS DETERMINED BY THE DVO. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. THE LD.CIT(A) IN PARA 9.1 OF HIS ORDER HAS MENTIONED THE ORDER PASSE D BY CIT(A)-XVI IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010(BY REVENUE)& CO NO.335/AHD/2010 (BY ASSESSEE) ACIT VS. SHRI YASINBHAI HAJISULEMANBHAI QURESHI ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 3 - AHMEDABAD IN CASE OF THE SELLERS. SINCE THE LD.CIT (A) ADOPTED THE VALUATION GIVEN BY THE DVO IN THE CASE OF THE SELLERS, THIS G ROUND OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS REJECTED. 6. GROUND NOS.2 & 3 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE, NEED NO INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. 8. NOW, WE TAKE UP THE ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION N O.335/AHD/2010 (IN IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010) FOR AY 2006-07. THE ASSES SEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION. ALL THE BELOW MENTIONED GROUNDS OF CROSS OBJECTION ARE INDEPENDENT AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 1. LEARNED A.O. ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS I N MAKING ADDITION OF RS.21,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED PURCHASE PRICE OF LAND AND CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING ADDI TION OF RS.10,82,000/-. HE OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE WHOLE ADDITION OF RS.21,00,000/-. 8.1. IT IS ADMITTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE THAT NO CROSS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALL ENGED THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION. THE LD.COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS.21 LACS. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.CIT-DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF TH E AO. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. SINCE WE HAVE AFFIRMED THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IN REVENUES APPEAL IN IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010(SUPRA) ON THIS ISSUE, FOLLOWING OUR DECISION, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION IS REJECTED. IT(SS)A NO.798/AHD/2010(BY REVENUE)& CO NO.335/AHD/2010 (BY ASSESSEE) ACIT VS. SHRI YASINBHAI HAJISULEMANBHAI QURESHI ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 4 - 10. IN THE COMBINED RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVEN UE AND CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BOTH ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED HER EINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- ( .. ) (' #$) ( N.S. SAINI ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUD ICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 05/ 02 /2014 60.., .../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS 3 / ,$7 87'$ 3 / ,$7 87'$ 3 / ,$7 87'$ 3 / ,$7 87'$/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-(+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. !! $ '9 / CONCERNED CIT 4. '9() / THE CIT(A)-I, AHMEDABAD 5. 7 #: ,$ , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :;& <. / GUARD FILE. 3' 3' 3' 3' / BY ORDER, -7$ ,$ //TRUE COPY// = == =/ // / !) !) !) !) ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 31.1.14 (DICTATION-PAD 5- P AGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 04.02.14 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER PLACED BEFOR E OTHER MEMBER 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.5.2.14 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 5.2.14 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