Income-tax Officer, V. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni, Pune

MA 31/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2715 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A , PUNE BEFORE: SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 31 /PN/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO S. 08 & 09/PN/2012 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 6 - 0 7 & 2008 - 09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), PUNE VS. SAPNA SANJAY RAISONI, PROP. MAHAVIR SALES CORPORATION, C 102, GAGAN GALAXY, MARKET YARD, PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. ACDPR0459D APPELLANT BY: MS. SHAILJA RAI RESPONDENT BY: SH RI SANKET JOSHI ORDER PER R.S . PADVEKAR , JM : - THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE U/S. 254(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT STATING THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHILE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF THE INTEREST PERTAINING TO THE INTEREST FREE ADVANCES. 2. IT IS STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS FOLLOWED ITS ORDER IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 BUT HAS DELETED THE ADDITION I N BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. A. YRS. 2006 - 07 AND 2008 - 09 , INSTEAD OF SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AS HELD IN ITA NO. 1472/PN/2010 ORDER DATED 20 - 05 - 2013. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A. YRS. 2006 - 0 7 AND 2008 - 09 BEING ITA NOS. 08 & 09/PN/2012 HAVE BEEN DECIDED VIDE ORDER DATED 28 - 05 - 2013 . O NE OF THE ISSUES WAS IN RESPECT OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE INTEREST PERTAINING TO INTEREST FREE ADVANCES. IN PARA NO. 11 OF THE ORDER, IT IS OBSERVED THAT IN 2 MA NO. 31/PN/2014, SAPNA SANJAY RAISONI, PUNE THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, IN THE IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS, WE HAVE DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 AND DELETED THE ADDITION. WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 DELETE SAID ADDITION. FOR THE BETTER CLARITY, WE REPRODUCE HEREUN DER THE PARA NOS. 10 AND 11 OF THE ORDER IN ITA NO. 08 AND 09/PN/2012. 10. THE NEXT ISSUE IS THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCES OF RS.41,754 / - IN THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 AND RS.3,15,829 / - IN THE A.Y. 2008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY. IN RESPECT OF THE A.Y. 2006 - 07, T HE A.O HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 68,433 / - WHICH WAS PAID TO ONE MR. KANTILAL JAIN AND CITI BANK CAR LOAN OF RS.26,529 / - AND AN AMOUNT OF RS.15,750 / - IN THE NAME OF MINORS. HE HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS ADVANCED RS. 23,00,000 / - TO FOUR INDIVIDUALS. HOWEVER, INTEREST HAS BEEN RECEIVED ONLY FROM ONE PERSON AMOUNTING TO RS.97,627 / - AND NO INTEREST HAS BEEN CHARGED ON THE ADVANCE OF RS.15,00,000 / - . THE A.O MADE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.41,754 / - IN RESPECT OF INTEREST PAID ON THE TRUCK LOAN. SAME WAY IN THE A.Y. 2008 - 09, THE A.O HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED INTEREST OF RS.3,52,029 / - WHICH WAS PAID TO INDIVIDUALS, TRUCK LOAN AND OTHERS. THE INTEREST IS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE ON UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.1,19,000 / - TAKE N BY AN INDIVIDUAL AND BALANCE INTEREST IS ON UNSECURED TAKEN FROM VARIOUS FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. THE A.O ALSO NOTED THAT IN THE BALANCE SHEET THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN ADVANCE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.84,13,417 / - ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS CHARGED INTEREST OF RS. 3,37,696 / - . THE A.O HAS ALSO OBSERVED E ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN INTEREST FREE ADVANCES. IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE INTEREST DEBITED TO P & L A / C BY THE ASSESSEE AND MADE THE ADDITION. THE LD. CIT(A) C ONFIRMED THE SAID ADDITION. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE, IN THE IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS, WE HAVE DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 AND DELETED THE ADDITION. WE THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 DELETE THIS ADDITION. ACCORDI NGLY, THE RESPECTIVE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS IS ALLOWED. 4. IN OUR OPINION THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AS ADMITTEDLY IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 IN ITA NO. 1472/PN/2010 THE ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. WE, 3 MA NO. 31/PN/2014, SAPNA SANJAY RAISONI, PUNE ACCORDINGLY, RECTIFY THE FINDING O N THE RELEVANT ISSUE AND IN PLACE OF PARA NO. 11 FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH IS SUBSTITUTED: WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE, ON THE IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS, THE TRIBU NAL HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THIS ISSUE NEEDS RECONSIDERATION AND ACCORDINGLY, THE TRIBUNAL SET ASIDE SAID ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE TRIBUNAL ALSO DIRECTED LD. CIT(A) TO CALL F OR THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE, FOLLOWING OUR REASONS AND DIRECTIONS IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RE STORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJU DI CATION . ACCORDINGLY, THE RELEVANT GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSE . THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE FINAL RESULT OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIO N IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 - 01 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.S. PANNU ) ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE , DATED : 30 TH JANUARY, 2015 RK/PS COPY TO 1 ASSESSEE 2 DEPAR TMENT 3 THE CIT(A) - II, PUNE 4 THE CIT - II , PUNE 5 THE DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE . 6 GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PUNE