Bansilal Bagri, CHENNAI V. DCIT Non Corporate Circle, CHENNAI

MA 292/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8161 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J PAVITRAN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

HNY/ , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.292 /CHNY/2019 [ IN I.T.A. NO. 859/CHNY/2018] ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) SHRI BANSILAL BAGRI, 6B, WADDLES ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI 600 010. PAN: AACPB6561B V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 10(1), CHENNAI. ( / APPLICANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPLICANT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J. PAVITRAN KUMAR, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 17.01.2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.01.2020 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.859/CHNY/2018 DATED 10.05.2019. 2 MA NO.292/CHNY/2019 2. SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL OBSERVED IN THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED BACK THE DONATION THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL AFTER REDUCING COMMISSION. HOWEVER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT WAS STATED THAT IT WAS THE MODUS OPERANDI WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY THE CONCERNED PARTIES DEALING WITH DONATION. ACCORDING TO LD.COUNSEL, THERE IS NO MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD THAT THE DONATIONS WERE RECEIVED BACK BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THERE IS A FACTUAL ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HEARD SHRI J. PAVITRAN KUMAR, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THIS TRIBUNAL AT PARA NO.9 OF ITS ORDER FOUND THAT THE TRANSACTION ULTIMATELY ENDED IN REFUND OF THE MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL AFTER REDUCING THE COMMISSION TO THE EXTENT OF 5%. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT PARA NO.4.2 OF HIS ORDER OBSERVED THAT THE BOGUS DONATIONS ARE RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE / RTGS IN ANY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT. FINALLY, THE DONATION AMOUNT AFTER DEDUCTING THE COMMISSION CHARGED WOULD BE GIVEN BACK TO THE ORIGINAL BENEFICIARY WHO GAVE THE DONATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO FOUND THAT COMMISSION WILL BE CHARGED 5 TO 8 % OF THE DONATION FOR PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. SINCE, THIS TRIBUNAL 3 MA NO.292/CHNY/2019 FACTUALLY RECORDED THE FINDING THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED BACK THE DONATION AFTER REDUCING THE COMMISSION, THERE IS NO PRIMA FACIE ERROR WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD AMOUNT TO REVISION OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE SCHEME OF INCOME TAX ACT. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JANUARY, 2020 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 17 TH JANUARY, 2020. RSR . /COPY TO: 1. / APPLICANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. [ /GF.