Calcutta Urology Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. ACIT, Central Circle-VII, Kolkata, Kolkata

MA 43/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2856 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO S . 43, 44, 45, 46 & 47 /KOL/201 4 (ARISING OUT OF I.T. (S.S) A. NO. 35, 36, 37, 38 & 39 /KOL/201 3 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 04 - 20 05 TO 2008 - 2009 CALCUTTA UROLOGY RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD., .................. APPLICANT 9/1, DR. LAL MOHAN BHATTACHARYA ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 014 [PAN : AA BCC 5906 B ] - VS. - ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, . ............. . RESPONDENT CENTRAL CIRCLE - VII , KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN PURVA, 110, SHANTIPALLY, 6 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 107 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI J.P. KHAITAN, ADVOCATE , FOR THE APPLICANT SHRI SANJAY , A CIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUA RY 20 , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUA RY 20 , 201 5 O R D E R PER SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH E S E ARE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION S FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN IT (S.S.) A NO S . 35 TO 39 /KOL/20 1 3 DATED 1 7.0 1 .201 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 20 04 - 05 TO 2008 - 09 . 2. SHRI J.P. KHAITAN, ADVOCATE , REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI SANJAY , A CIT , SR. D.R., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, I T WAS SUBMITTED BY T HE LD. A .R. ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE 2 THREE ADDITIONS; ONE REPRESENTING THE ESTIMATED PROFIT IN RESPECT OF THE TURNOVER DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS A/C. BY APPLYING THE RATE OF 35%. THE SECOND BEING AN ADDITION REPRESENTING THE UNDISCLOSED TURNOVER FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND THE THIRD ADDITION REPRESENTING INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL HAD IN PARA 7 AT PAGE 6 HELD THAT THE PROFIT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS WAS TO BE REWORKED @ 10% TO 25% AS A STAGGERED MANNER FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD NOT DECIDED THE ISSUE OF THE ADDITION REPRESENTING THE UNDISCLOSED TURNOVER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THIS REQUIRED CLARIFICATION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THIS CLARIFICATION SOUGHT FOR MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHETHER THE ADDITION REPRESENTING THE UNDISCLOSED TURNOVER HAD BEEN DELETED OR NOT. 4. IN REPLY, LD. SR. D.R. S UBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ADMITTED IN ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND GROUND NO. 1 ITSELF THAT THE UNDISCLOSED TURNOVER HAD BEEN OFFERED AS INCOME. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC GROUND CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF THE UNDISCLOSED TURNOVER AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ISSUE NOW RAISED WAS IN EFFECT OF FRESH ISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN PUT FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS WERE LIABLE TO BE REJECTED. 5. W E HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL MORE SO IN PARA 7 AT PAGE 6 CLEARLY S AY S AS FOLLOWS: IN VIEW OF THIS FACT, IN OUR OPINION, THIS WILL MEET THE CANONS OF JUSTICE TO BOTH THE PARTIES, IF PROFIT FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR IS ESTIMATED @ 10%, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 @ 12.5%, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 @ 15%, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 @ 20% AND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 @ 25% . THE WORDS USED IN THE ORDER ARE CLEARLY PROFIT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. HAVING SPECIFICALLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE OF THE PROFIT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, NOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSE S SEE FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS IS NOTHING BUT REVIEW OF THE ORDER. OBVIOUSLY WHEN PROFIT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 3 MENTIONED, THE PROFIT HAS T O BE DECIDED FOR THE TURNOVER IN ITS ENTIRETY. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ONLY IN REGARD TO SEEKING OF CLARIFICATION AS IS EVIDENT FROM PARA 4 OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS AND AS NO ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OU RT ON 20 TH DAY OF FEBRU ARY , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - SHAMIM YAHYA GEORGE MATHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 20 TH DAY OF FEBRU ARY , 201 5 COPIES TO : (1) CALCUTTA UROLOGY RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD., 9/1, DR. LAL MO HAN BHATTACHARYA ROAD, KOLKATA - 700 014 (2 ) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - VII, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN PURVA, 110, SHANTIPALLY, 6 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA - 700 107 ( 3 ) CIT ( 4 ) CIT(A) ( 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( 6 ) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA B ENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.