CALYON BANK, V. DDIT (IT) CIR 1(2)RG 11(),

MA 112/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0978 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: L
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: BHARAT J ANARTHANAN
• Keywords: Business income; Reason to believe
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL K BENCH, MUMBAI . . , ,, , , !' !' !' !' , ,, , # # # # $ $ $ $ BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER %% & . / M .A. NO.112/MUM./2013 . / ITA NO. 5145/MUM./2013 () * ( #& + ,+ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 199798 ) CALYON BANK (FORMERLY CREDIT AGRICOLE INDOSUES) HOECHST HOUSE, 11 TH , 12 TH & 14 TH FLOORS NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021 .. / APPLICANT & V/S DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTT. TAX) CIRCLE1(2), SCINDIA HOUSE, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI 400 038 WARD2(2)3, MUMBAI .... -./0 / RESPONDENT / . / PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AACCC3872B #& +2 3 4 / ASSESSEE BY : MR. BHARAT JANARTHANAN 5 3 4 / REVENUE BY : MR. SURENDRA KUMAR & 3 / DATE OF HEARING 30.08.2013 ! 67, 3 / DATE OF ORDER 30.08.2013 ! ! ! ! / ORDER !' !' !' !' , ,, , # # # # 8 8 8 8 / PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN PREF ERRED BY THE ASSESSEE POINTING OUT THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDE R DATED 21 ST SEPTEMBER 2012, WHILE INCORPORATING THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE CASE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR CALYON BANK 2 199798, IN PARA3 OF THE ORDER HAD IN FACT, INCORP ORATED THE REASONS RECORDED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 199394, WHICH WAS IN SUBS TANCE WAS SIMILAR TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 199394, INCORPORATED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 14/PAGE13 OF THE ORDER. THEREFORE, TO THIS EXTENT, THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN PARA3 OF THE ORDER WHICH S HOULD BE RECTIFIED. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO ADMITTED T O THIS FACT. 2. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SAID PARA3 OF THE ORDER DA TED 21 ST SEPTEMBER 2012, WE FIND THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE I S CORRECT INSOFAR AS IN PARA3 WHILE INCORPORATING THE REASONS RECORDED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 199798 BY MISTAKE, REASONS RECORDED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 199394 HAS BEEN REPRODUCED. THUS, THE REASONS RECORDED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 199798, WILL BE READ IN PARA3 AS UNDER: REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HA S ESCAPED ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 THE ASSESSEE A NONRESIDENT BANKING COMPANY, FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 199798 ON 26.11.1997, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 14,16,46,210. 2. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, ON 31.01.2000 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF ` 26,59,01,147. 3. IT IS SEEN FROM THE DETAILS FILED, THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD RECEIVED INTEREST ON NOSTRO ACCOUNTS AMOUNTING TO ` 13,66,37,677 ALONG WITH INTEREST FROM CORRESPONDENCE BRANCHES AMOUNTING TO ` 29,52,971, AND COMMISSION RECEIVED FROM BRANCHES AMOUNTING TO ` 3,86,797. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT OFFERED THESE THREE ITEMS FOR TAX. ALTHOUGH THE FIRST TWO ITEMS WERE BROUGHT TO TAX, THE THIRD ITEM REMAI NED TO BE TAXED. 4. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE BANK HAD PAID A SUM OF ` 18,93,305 BY WAY OF COMMISSION TO VARIOUS OTHER BRA NCHES AND CORRESPONDENCE ALONG WITH A SUM OF ` 2,57,312 BY WAY OF INTEREST TO OVERSEAS BRANCHES AND CORRESPONDENCE. NO DETAILS HA VE BEEN FURNISHED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AS TO WHETHER TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE BY THE ASSESSEE BANK ON THESE PAYMENTS. FURT HER, THESE TWO SUMS RECEIVED BY OVERSEAS BRANCHES / CORRESPONDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BANK, REPRESENT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DISTINCT FRO M THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE PE IN INDIA OF THE ASSESSEE BANK. ACC ORDINGLY, THESE TWO SUMS ALSO NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF ` 24,83,414 CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 199798. 6. THE TIME LIMIT OF INITIATING PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECT ION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 EXPIRES ON 31032004. APPROVA L OF THE DIT(IT) MUMBAI HAS BEEN OBTAINED VIDE LETTER NO.DIT(IT)/REO PENING ASSTT./ 200304 DATED 31032004. CALYON BANK 3 7. ISSUE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. THUS, THE ORDER DATED 21 ST SEPTEMBER 2012 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS MODIFIED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT ONLY. 4. 2 9 #& +2 %% & : & 5 ;< = 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES MISC. APPLICATION IS TREA TED AS ALLOWED. ! 3 7, > ?&9 30 TH AUGUST 2013 7 3 @ = ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH AUGUST 2013 SD/- . . R.S. SYAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- !' !' !' !' # # # # AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, ?& ?& ?& ?& DATED: 30 TH AUGUST 2013 ! 3 -# % A%, / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) #& +2 / THE ASSESSEE; (2) 5 / THE REVENUE; (3) B () / THE CIT(A); (4) B / THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) %E@ -# #& , , / THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) @F+ G / GUARD FILE. .% -# / TRUE COPY !& / BY ORDER - 5. HI / PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY 2J #&5 H / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ( / ; 5 / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI