ACIT, CHENNAI V. Laxmi Jewellery, CHENNAI

MA 120/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2289 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 120/MDS/2014 ( IN ITA NO. 685/MDS/2012 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-XI, CHENNAI-6 (PETITIONER) VS M/S.LAXMI JEWELLERY, NO.65, NSC BOSE ROAD, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI-600 003 [PAN: AAAFL 0161 F] (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI S. DAS GUPTA , JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR , CA., DATE OF HEARING : 01-08-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01-08-2014 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE R EVENUE WITH THE PRAYER THAT ONE OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY T HE DEPARTMENT IN ITS APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBU NAL. THE SPECIFIC GROUND ALLEGEDLY NOT CONSIDERED BY THE TRI BUNAL AS STATED IN MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS RE-PRODUCED AS UNDER: GROUND NO.1: THE LD.CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE T HAT IN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND MR. ARUN JAIN IT IS CLEARLY STATED M.P. NO. 120/MDS/2014 :- 2 -: THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN USE THE GOLD IN THE MANNER IT LIKED AND IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY TO RETURN THE GOLD IN THE SAME FORMAT. 2. SHRI T.BANUSEKAR, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDER ATION ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL AND PRA YED FOR DISMISSING THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES. THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER DT.08-05-2013 IN PARA NO.5 HAVE CONCISED THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. THE FIRST ISSUE RELATING TO UNCOUNTED GOLD PURCHASE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE PARTIES AND THE GOLD RECEI VED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM MR.ARUN JAIN IS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE ORDER. THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE FIRST GROUND HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AND AFTER DETAILED FINDINGS HAS BEEN DIS MISSED BEING DEVOID OF MERIT. 4. DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE CIT( APPEALS) HAS SOUGHT REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER INTER ALIA IN RESPECT OF THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELA TING TO GOLD LOANS TAKEN FROM MR.ARUN JAIN. THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER DID NOT M.P. NO. 120/MDS/2014 :- 3 -: MAKE ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE ABOUT THE GOLD LOANS TAK EN BY ASSESSEE FROM MR.ARUN JAIN. THE CIT(APPEALS) IN HI S ORDER OBSERVED THAT, DOCUMENTS ON RECORD CLEARLY SHOW THA T MR.ARUN JAIN HAS GIVEN LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE, THE DR FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTH ORITY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BEING DEVOID OF MERIT. 5. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MISTAKE MUCH LESS ANY APPAREN T MISTAKE IN THE ORDER DT.08-05-2013 WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICA TION. THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 01 ST AUGUST, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VI KAS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 01 ST AUGUST, 2014 TNMM COPY TO: (1) PETITIONER (4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.