M.Bhagichand Gulecha, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 181/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1236 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM
• Assessee Lawyers: T VASUDEVAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 180/MDS/2013 ( IN ITA NO. 1993/MDS/2011 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI M. BABULAL GULECHA, 390/2, MINT STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI-600 079 [PAN: AACPG 7222 Q] VS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-X, CHENNAI M.P. NO. 181/MDS/2013 ( IN ITA NO.1994/MDS/2011 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI M. BHAGIACHAND GULECHA, 390/2, MINT STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI-600 079 [PAN: AACPG 7201 K] (PETITIONER) VS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-X, CHENNAI (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI T. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GURU BHASHYAM, J CIT DATE OF HEARING : 13-12-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-12-2013 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS U/S. 254(2) OF THE INC OME TAX ACT HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FOR RECTIFICAT ION OF THE M.P. NOS. 180 & 181/MDS/13 :- 2 -: COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 28-08-2013, WHER EBY THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES WERE DISMISSED BEING DEVOI D OF MERIT. 2. SHRI T. VASUDEVAN, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE SUBMITTED THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS, THE TRIB UNAL HAS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ALTERNATIVE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF PRODUCING MR. MAHADEVAN , DIRECTOR OF M/S. PENTAGON GLOBAL SERVICES LTD., BEFORE THE AUTH ORITIES BELOW. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI GURU BHASHYAM, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE STRONGLY OPPOSING THE MISCELL ANEOUS PETITIONS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS WELL REASONED AND THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER WHICH WARRANTS R ECTIFICATION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES. THE LD.COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ENTIR E TRANSACTION OF RECEIVING ADVANCE AMOUNT IN CASH FOR THE PROPOSED S ALE WAS BONAFIDE AND THE DEPOSIT OF THE SAID CASH IN THE BA NK ACCOUNT AND SUBSEQUENT WITHDRAWAL OF THE SAME TO BE RETURNED TO THE M.P. NOS. 180 & 181/MDS/13 :- 3 -: COMPANY WAS GENUINE. TO SUPPORT THIS ENTIRE TRANSA CTION, MR. MAHADEVAN HAD FURNISHED AN AFFIDAVIT. THE LD. COUNSEL PRAYED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSE SSEE TO PRODUCE MR. MAHADEVAN BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ORDER TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE ENTIRE TRANSACTION. 5. IN THE ORDER DATED 28-08-2013, THE BENCH HAD ALR EADY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE ENTIRE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY T HE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES. THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES WERE DISMISSED NOT ONLY FOR THE REASONS T HAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMP ANY WHO HAD EXECUTED THE AFFIDAVITS BUT ALSO ON MERITS. THE AS SESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO SHOW FROM THE RECORDS, ANY PLAUSIBLE REASON TO MAKE PAYMENTS AMOUNTING TO ` 24.00 LAKHS IN CASH AND NOT THROUGH ANY BANKING CHANNEL. 6. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT BY WAY OF PRESENT PETITIONS, THE ASSESSEES ARE ONLY SEEKING REVIEW OF THE ORDER, WHICH IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 254(2) OF THE ACT. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO M.P. NOS. 180 & 181/MDS/13 :- 4 -: SHOW ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORDS THAT NEEDS R ECTIFICATION. THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS AN D HENCE, ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 30 TH DECEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VIK AS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30 TH DECEMBER, 2013 TNMM COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR