Sh. Shanjay Kr. Agarwal, Chhatarpur V. Dy. C.I.T. Range-1, Gwalior

MA 8/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7885 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOHAIL AKHTAR
• Keywords: Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI A. L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 08/AGRA/2011 (IN C.O. NO. 23/AGRA/2006 IN IT(SS)A NO. 09/AGRA/20 03 ) BLOCK PERIOD : 01.04.89 TO 18.01.2000 SHRI SANJAY KUMAR AGARWAL, VS. D.C.I.T. RANGE-1, C/O M/S. CHOUDHARY LADAMANDAS SARAF, GWALIOR. CHOWK BAZAR, CHHATARPUR (M.P.) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SOHAIL AKHTAR, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 20.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.04.2012 ORDER PER BENCH : NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE S ERVICE OF NOTICE. WRITTEN SUBMISSION IS FORWARDED BY SHRI G.N. PUROHIT, SR. A DVOCATE, WHICH IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CROSS- OBJECTION HAS BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE REVIEWED. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE GRIEVANCE IN DISPOSA L OF THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE NO. 23/AGRA/2006, IN WHICH THE ASSESSE E CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS.90,500/-. THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO PARA 11 OF TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DEALING M.A. NO.08/AGRA/2011 2 WITH THE ABOVE ISSUE. IN PARA 11 OF THE ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD CONFIRMED THE AD DITION BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE REVE NUE AUTHORITIES FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CLAIM IN DISPUTE. IT WAS ALSO NO TED THAT SINCE NO EXPLANATION HAS BEEN GIVEN ON THIS ISSUE, THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN M.A. AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE IT WAS A CASE OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, ADDITION COULD BE BASED ON THE MATERIAL RECOVERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR SURVEY. HO WEVER, IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ADDITION OF RS.90,500/- WAS BASED ON THE BALANCE SH EET PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE AR E NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE SUCCESSIVE BENC H OF THE TRIBUNAL WOULD NOT SIT IN APPEAL AGAINST THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED ON MERITS. THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DISPOSING OF THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSES SEE SPECIFICALLY NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAI M IN DISPUTE AND FURTHER NO EXPLANATION, WHATSOEVER, HAS BEEN GIVEN DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALSO. IT IS ALSO WELL SETTLED LAW THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO M.A. NO.08/AGRA/2011 3 REVIEW ITS EARLIER ORDER PASSED ON MERITS. WE ARE F ORTIFIED IN OUR VIEW BY THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF AGRAWAL WAREHOUSING AND LEASING LTD. VS. CIT, 257 ITR 235 (MP), DECISION OF HONBLE A.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. IDEAL ENGINEER, 251 ITR 743 AND DECISION OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ANAMIKA BUILDERS PVT. LTD., 251 ITR 585 (CAL.). ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO MISTAKE POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. M.A. IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE M.A. OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.04.2012. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY