M.Shahul Hameed, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 59/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2779 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 09-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N MADHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , D B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! # % & , ' ! ( BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.59/ MDS/2014 (IN ITA.NO.1704/MDS/2012 ) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) MR. M.SHAHUL HAMEED 85/48, M.K.N. ROAD, GUINDY, CHENNAI-600 032. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-V, CHENNAI-600 034. PAN: AYUPS6694J ( PETITIONER ) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MR. N.MADHAVAN, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 9 TH JANUARY, 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE STATING AS UNDER:- IT IS SUBMITTED THAT UNSECURED LOANS OF ` 3,60,78,840/- AND TRADE CREDITORS OF ` 1,09,38,916/- AS REFLECTED IN THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET ARE NOT DISPUTED AT ANY STAGE. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AGGREGATE OF ` 1,38,26,840/- ( ` 59,78,840/- OUT OF ` 3,60,78,840/- UNDER THE HEAD UNSECURED LOANS AND ` 78,48,000/- OUT OF ` 1,09,38,916/- UNDER THE HEAD TRADE CREDITORS) IS THE FIGURE DISPUTED IN THE M.P.NO.59/MDS/2014 2 SURVEY PROCEEDINGS AS REFLECTED IN THE SURVEY STATEMENT AND THE BALANCE AMOUNTS WERE ADMITTEDLY AND ESTABLISHED TO BE ROUTED THROUGH PROPER BANKING CHANNEL. THE MISTAKE COMMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND CARRIED THROUGH TO THE TWO APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAS TRIGGERED THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT FOR APPROPRIATELY QUANTIFYING THE AMOUNTS CONFIRMED AND TO BE CONFIRMED FOR WANT OF EVIDENCE FOR THE SOURCE EVEN THOUGH EXPLAINED AT VARIOUS STAGES AND NOW THE DECISION OF THE BENCH IS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN T.C.A. NO.28/2014 WHICH APPEAL IS PENDING FOR DECISION. 2. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT WHILE COMP LETING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED ` 1,38,00,000 /- TOWARDS TRADE CREDITORS AND ` 3,71,00,000/- TOWARDS UNSECURED LOANS. WHILE ADOPTING THOSE FIGUR ES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE A MISTAKE AND THE VERY SAME MISTAKE CARRIED THROUGH THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AS WELL AS THI S TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, ASSESSEE FILED THIS PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT FOR M.P.NO.59/MDS/2014 3 APPROPRIATELY QUANTIFYING THE AMOUNTS CONFIRMED AND TO BE CONFIRMED FOR WANT OF EVIDENCE FOR THE SOURCE. 3. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRI BUNAL AND THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S NOTHING BUT REVIEW PETITION. 4. HEARD BOTH SIDES. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY SPECIFIC ERROR OR MISTAKE CREPT IN TH E ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL EXCEPT SAYING THAT ASSESSING OFFICER MADE A MISTAKE IN ADOPTING FIGURES FOR DISALLOWANCE TOWARDS TRADE CREDITORS AND UNSECURED LOANS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLET ED THE ASSESSMENT BY DISALLOWING TRADE CREDITORS AMOUNTING TO ` 1,38,00,000/- AND UNSECURED LOANS AMOUNTING TO ` 3,71,00,000/- ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT P ROVED IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, CAPACITY OF THE CREDITOR S TO ADVANCE MONEY AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THE SAID ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES WERE CONFIRMED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WHICH ORDER WA S SUSTAINED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS CO MING UP M.P.NO.59/MDS/2014 4 WITH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION STATING THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE IN ADOPTING FIGURES BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY MAK ING SOME SUBMISSIONS. NONE OF THESE SUBMISSIONS WERE EVER MA DE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER / COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) OR BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE EARLIER AP PEAL PROCEEDINGS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE NEW PLEA CA NNOT BE ENTERTAINED IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION. NO MIST AKE OR ERROR HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TR IBUNAL. THUS, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS DISMISSED AS NO ERROR CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THIS TR IBUNAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE ASS ESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY, T HE 13 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( # &' ( ) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( CHALLA NAGENDRA PR ASAD ) * / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &, * / JUDICIAL MEMBER & /CHENNAI, . /DATED,13 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 SOMU M.P.NO.59/MDS/2014 5 (,12 42 /COPY TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. (57 /RESPONDENT 3. 8 () /CIT(A) 4. 8 /CIT 5. 2 (,,; /DR 6. > /GF .