M/s State Bank of India (Sucessor to State Bank of Patiala), Patiala V. ACIT, Circle, Patiala

MA 250/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1856 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B , CHANDIGARH , . ... , %& BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NOS.250 & 251/CHD/2018 IN ./ ITA NOS.384 & 385/CHD/2008 /ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 2000-01 M/S STATE BANK OF INDIA (SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF PATIALA), PATIALA. THE A.C.I.T., CIRCLE PATIALA. ./PAN NO: AACCS0143D /APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.NARESH, CA ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH SR.DR ' # $ /DATE OF HEARING : 12.03.2019 %&'( $ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14.06. 2019 /ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE, STATE BANK OF INDIA PLEADING THEREIN THAT A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD HAS OCCUR RED IN THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 3.8.2018 OF THIS TRIBU NAL, PASSED IN ITA NOS.384 & 385/CHD/2008, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 RESPECTIVELY . IT HAS BEEN PLEADED IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE TRIBUN AL VIDE 2 PARA-3 OF THE SAID CONSOLIDATED ORDER HAS DISPOSED OFF GROUND NOS.1, 2 & 4 OF THE APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 1999-2000 AND GROUND NOS.1 & 2 OF THE APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-2001, PERTAINING TO THE VALIDI TY OF ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/ S 147 OF THE ACT AS NOT PRESSED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT HAS BE EN PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY PRESSED THE AFOR ESAID GROUNDS. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL INADVERTENTLY NOTED THAT THESE GROUNDS WERE NOT PRESSED AND HENCE, DISMISSED THE SAME WITHOUT ADJUDICATION. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT HAS MADE FOLLOWING WRITTE N SUBMISSION: 1. IN THE ORDER OF HON'BLE ITAT, IN ITA NO. 384 & 385/CHD/2008 FOR A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000-2001 DATED 03/08/2018, IT WAS HELD IN PARA NO. 3, PAGE 2 AS UN DER. 'GROUND NO. 1, 2 AND 4 FOR THE A.Y. 1999-2000 AND GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 FOR A. Y. 2000-2001 PERTAINING TO ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 ARE NOT PRESSED BY THE ASS ESSEE THEREFORE NO ADJUDICATION IS REQUIRED' 2. THE APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT S THAT THIS CASE WAS HEARD ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS STARTING FR OM 2015. AT THE TIME OF INITIAL HEARINGS IN 2015, THE AR IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE HON'BLE MEMBERS FOR THE AY 2000-01 HAD INDICATED AGAINST GROUND NO.L RELATING TO JURISDICT ION, THAT THE GROUND IS NOT PRESSED AS THE SAME WAS NOT PERMITTED BY COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES. HOWEVER, IN AY 1999-00 THERE WAS NO SUCH ISSUE. 3. HOWEVER, IN SUBSEQUENT HEARINGS, BASED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD (332 ITR 58) W HICH HAD 3 HELD THAT THE APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR PURSUING THE APPEALS BEFORE HONORABLE ITAT & COURTS, THIS ISSUE WAS ARGUED BY A R AS THE COMMITTEE PERMITTED THE ISSUE TO BE AGITATED. 4. THE AR HAD SUBMITTED DURING VARIOUS HEARINGS THA T THE REOPENING WAS BAD IN LAW FOR BOTH AY 1999-00 AND 20 00-01 AND THIS ISSUE WAS EXTENSIVELY ARGUED ON VARIOUS OC CASIONS AND EVEN WHEN THE MATTER WAS FINALLY HEARD BY YOUR HONOR'S ON JUNE 5 TH , 2018. THE PAPER BOOK THAT HAD BEEN FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT ALSO CONTAINED VARIOUS DOCUMENTS ON T HE ISSUE OF REOPENING SUCH AS NOTICE OF REOPENING, REA SONS FOR REOPENING, THE SUBMISSIONS MADE TO ASSESSING OFFICE R AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ETC. THE AR HAD ELABORA TELY ARGUED, BASED ON PAPER BOOKS, TO CONTEST THAT REOPE NING WAS BAD IN LAW. 5. HOWEVER, WHILE PASSING THE ORDER, THIS GROUND WA S DECIDED AS NOT PRESSED FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS PROBAB LY FOR THE REASONTHATINAY2000-01,AGAINST THE GROUND RELATI NG TO JURISDICTION, IT WAS MENTIONED AS NOT PRESSED AS TH E SAME WAS NOT PERMITTED BY COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES EVEN THO UGH THIS ISSUE WAS ARGUED IN ALL HEARINGS. 6. THE APPELLANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS THAT IT WAS N EVER THE INTENTION TO WITHDRAW THE ABOVE GROUND AND THE ERRO R IN AY 2000-01'HADOCCURREDONACCOUNT OF THE GENUINE DOUBT CAUSED ABOUT THE REQUIREMENT OF APPROVAL FROM COMMI TTEE ON DISPUTES. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPELLANT RESPECTFULLY PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON THIS ISSUE MAY KIN DLY BE RECALLED FOR BOTH THE YEARS AND ADJUDICATED UPON IN ORDER TO RENDER JUSTICE. 2. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS SUBMITTED THA T NO MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD HAS OCCURRED IN THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 3.8.2018 OF THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. A PERU SAL OF THE RELEVANT GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL NOS.1, 2 & 4 RAISED IN ITA NO.384/CHD/2008 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 4 1999-2000, VIDE WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED T HE VALIDITY OF THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147 OF THE ACT READ WITH SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, REVEALS A NOT E HAS BEEN GIVEN AS NOT PRESSED AGAINST THE SAID GROUND S. IN RESPECT OF IDENTICAL GROUNDS TAKEN IN ITA NO.385/CHD/2008 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 , FOLLOWING NOTE HAS BEEN GIVEN AGAINST GROUND NOS.1 &2, UNDER THE SIGNATURE OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE : NOT PRESSED AS NOT PERMITTED BY COD 4. AS REVEALED FROM THE WRITTEN ARGUMENTS ABOVE TH AT INITIALLY THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRESSED THE AFORESAI D GROUNDS AS THE SAME WERE NOT PERMITTED BY THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES. HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY, AS HELD IN THE OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COUR T IN THE CASE OF ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. ( SUPRA), THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES WAS NOT REQUIRED FOR PURSUING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE I.T.A. T. AND COURTS. THE ASSESSEE, ACCORDINGLY, DULY PRESSED THO SE GROUNDS. WE HAVE ALSO REFERRED TO OUR LOGBOOK AND F IND THAT THE ARGUMENTS WERE ADDRESSED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSSESSEE ON THE LEGAL ISSUES RELEVANT TO THE V ALIDITY OF THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. THE ABOVE SAID GROUNDS INADVERTENTLY WERE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSE D 5 BECAUSE OF THE EARLIER NOTE PUT ON AGAINST THE AFOR ESAID GROUNDS. EARLIER, THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES HAD NOT PERMITTED TO RAISE THE AFORESAID GROUNDS. HOWEVER, LATER ON SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD BECOME ENTITLED TO RAISE AND PRESS THESE LEGAL ISSUES, WHICH GO TO THE ROOT OF T HE CASE, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, DULY PRESSED THE S AME DURING ARGUMENTS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD HAS OCCURRED IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE AFORESAID LEGAL IS SUES ON MERITS. THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 3.8.2018 OF TH IS TRIBUNAL IS, THEREFORE, RECALLED TO THE LIMITED EXT ENT AND PURPOSE FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE GROUND NOS.1, 2 & 4 OF ITA NO.384/CHD/2008 AND GROUND NOS.1 & 2 OF ITA NO.385/CHD/2008 RELATING TO THE LEGAL ISSUES OF VAL IDITY OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147 R.W.S. 148 O F THE ACT. HOWEVER, THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL GIVEN ON MERITS IN RELATION TO OTHER ISSUES WILL REMAIN AS SUCH. IF THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS ON THE LEGAL ISSUES RELATING TO T HE VALIDITY OF THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE CONSEQUENCE WILL BE THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUN AL GIVEN ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE WILL BE RENDERED AC ADEMIC IN NATURE AND WILL NOT BE OPERATING. HOWEVER, IF TH IS LEGAL ISSUE IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THE FINDINGS OF THE 6 TRIBUNAL GIVEN ON MERITS WILL REMAIN OPERATING. WIT H THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE HEREBY ALLOWED. THE MAIN APPEALS A RE DIRECTED TO BE FIXED BY THE REGISTRY IN REGULAR COU RSE FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE LEGAL ISSUES AS DIRECTED ABOVE. A COPY OF THIS ORDER BE ALSO PLACED IN THE MAIN FILES BEAR ING ITA NOS.384 & 385/CHD/2008 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 AND 2000-01. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO NS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- . ... (SANJAY GARG ) (DR.B.R.R.KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER & /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER () /DATED: 14.06.2019 * * & *+ ,+ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ' - / CIT 4. ' - ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. +./ 0 , $ 0 , 123/4 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. /3 5# / GUARD FILE & ' / BY ORDER, ! / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR