The ACIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda V. Shri Bharat R. Choksi, Baroda

MA 116/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3847 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Block assessment; Set aside
• Section: 143(2); 158BC; 43

Judgement Text

, ‘D’ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 116/Ahd/2018 (in IT(SS)A No. 151/Ahd/2005) ( /Assess ment Year : Block Year: 86-87 to 15-12-95) Th e AC IT Cir cl e- 1( 2), A h med aba d / V s . Sh ri B ha rat R . Ch ok si 86/ 87 , A mba la l Pa r k, Op p. Pe tr ol P u mp, Kar el ib au g, Va do da ra / /P A N / G IR N o . : A B IP C 0 9 5 3 D ( /Appellant) . . ( / Respondent) /Appellant by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R. / Respondent by : Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate / D a t e o f H e a r i n g 10/06/2022 !"# /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 22/06/2022 ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM: This miscellaneous application has been filed by the Revenue under s.254(2) of the Act against the Tribunal order dated 17.11.2017 to recall the impugned order. 2. This Miscellaneous Application has been instituted by the AO wherein it is mentioned that: MA No. 116/Ahd/2018 [ACIT vs. Shri Bharat R. Choksi] - 2 - “1. It is submitted that vide Order of the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad "D Bench" Ahmedabad in IT(SS)A No. 151/Ahd/2005 in the case of Sh. Bharat R. Choksi Vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda, dated 17.11.2017 for the block year (starting from 1986-87 and ending on 15.12,1995), the Hon'ble ITAT has allowed the appeal of the assessee and quashed the set aside assessment order on the ground that "notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 22.11.2004 i.e. in the set aside assessment proceeding. This notice was not served within time limit for the purpose of making regular assessment order. This notice ought to be issued within one year from the date of filing of block return." 2. The aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble ITAT may kindly be reconsidered since the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on above mentioned ground. On the basis of the case record, available with this office, it has transpired that assessee filed his return of income for block period on 26.11.1996. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 27.11.1996 and duly served to Sh. Mayur Shah, authorized representative of the assessee (Copy of notice u/s 143(2) and authority letter is available on record). 3. Brief facts of the case are that a search operation was conducted out at the residence of Sh. Bharat R. Choksi and group concerns. Block assessment was finalized vide order u/s 158BC dated 23.12.1996 and total undisclosed income was computed at Rs. 3,16,07,410/-. Being aggrieved with the order of the assessing officer, assessee preferred appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad. Hon'ble ITAT vide common order in the group cases by order numbers 41,42,44,46,47,49 to 57/Ahd/1997 and 44/Ahd/1998 dated 17.07.2003 restored back the appeal to the file of the assessing officer for making the fresh assessment. Further, assessment in the case was finalized vide assessment order dated 30.03.2005 and total income was computed at Rs. 1,52,08,714/-.Being aggrieved with this order of the assessing officer, assessee again preferred appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad. Hon'ble ITAT vide common order dated 17.11.2017 in appeal no. 139, 144, 148, 150 and 151/Ahd/2005 quashed the assessment order in the case of Sh. Bharat R. Choksi on the ground that notice u/s 143(2) was not served within time limit for the purpose of making regular assessment order. 4. Assessee did not contest this issue during the course of regular assessment proceeding, first appeal before Hon'ble ITAT and set aside assessment proceeding. During the course of appellate proceeding against original assessment order, said assessment order was set aside vide order dated 17.07.2003 and A.O. was directed to frame fresh assessment. During, the course of the appellate proceeding against original assessment order, assessee did not object on this ground. During the course of appellate proceeding before the Hon'ble ITAT, assessee presented wrong facts. In this way assessee misguided the Hon'ble ITAT. Actually notice u/s 143(2) was issued well within the prescribed time for issuance of the notice after filing of the return of income for block period and duly served to the authorized representative of the assessee. This fact was also mentioned on the page no. 2 of the original assessment order for the block period that notice u/s 143(2) was issued during assessment proceeding for block period. The Hon'ble ITAT has perused the case records during the course of appellate proceeding of this case.” 3. W e ha ve h ear d bo th th e pa rti es . I n t hi s ca se , IT AT in i ts o rde r me nti on ed th at in t he c as e of S hr i Bh ara t R . C h ok si vs. AC IT an d ass es se e ha s r ai se d pr el i min ar y i ss ue tha t no ti ce un de r S . 1 43 (2 ) of the Ac t wa s n ot ser ved up on wi thi n o n e ye ar f ro m t he d at e of f ilin g MA No. 116/Ahd/2018 [ACIT vs. Shri Bharat R. Choksi] - 3 - of blo ck ret ur n. T her ef or e, i n v ie w o f the H on ’b le Hig h Co urt in the c ase of AC I T v s. H ot el Bl ue M oo n 3 21 I TR 36 2, th es e ass es s men t ye a rs a re no t s us ta in ab le. T her ef or e, th e d epa rt me nt sh oul d not ta ke an y ac ti on ag ai ns t t h e as se ss ee . In t hi s ca se , t he ret ur n of in co me f o r b lo ck pe ri od f or F. Y. 19 85 -8 6 to 15 -12 -9 5 wa s f urni sh ed on 26 .1 1 .19 96 s ho wi ng th er e is t ota l u nd is cl os ed i nc o me of Rs .9 ,4 5, 20 8/ - a nd in a cc ord an ce wit h th e pr ov ision s of C ha pt er 14 B n ot ic e u nd er S . 1 58 BC of t he Ac t da te d 1 9. 03 .1 99 6 was i ss ue d and ser ve d up on t he as se ss ee . The cas e wa s re pr es en t ed b y Sh ri Ma jur S hah , C. A. wh o a tte nd ed on beh alf of t he a ssess ee in res po ns e t o no tic e un der S .1 42 (1) & 1 43( 2) of t he Ac t. Des pi te of the f ac t t ha t no ti c e wa s i ss ue d un de r S. 15 8B C o n 1 9. 0 3.1 99 6, no ret ur n of inc o me f or bl oc k p er io d w a s f ile d ti ll 25.1 1. 1 99 6. Th us , of f ice or de r s he et, re min de rs we re i gn ore d b y t he ass es se e an d o ur att e mpt f o r c o mpl ia nce an d c or po ra tio n f ro m a ss es see f ail e d. As we can see no tic e w as iss ue d wi th in one ye a r b ut a ss essee h as b ro ug ht wro n g f acts b ef or e the T ri bu na l an d mi s-l ea de d th e IT AT. A s ass es se e mi s- le ad e d th e Tr ib un al a nd not ice wa s is su ed wit hi n th e pre sc ri be d p er io d, t her ef or e, we r eca ll our o rd er da te d 17 . 11. 20 17 . 4. In th e r es ul t, t he mi sce ll an eo us ap pli ca ti on s file d b y the Re ven ue i s all o wed . Sd/- Sd/- ( WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACC OUNTANT MEMB ER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 22/06/2022 True Copy S.K.SINHA ेश ! " #े" / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- $ / Revenue 2 द / Assessee This Order pronounced in Open Court on 22/06/2022 MA No. 116/Ahd/2018 [ACIT vs. Shri Bharat R. Choksi] - 4 - ' ( )* + / Concerned CIT 4 + - / CIT (A) . / 0 1 2 2 )*3 )* #3 45द ( द / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6 1 78 9 / Guard file. By order/ द श 3 उ / 4 )* #3 45द ( द ।