ITO, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad V. T. Appa Rao, Hyderabad

MA 87/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2088 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO.87/HYD/2014 (IN ITA NO.1533/HYD/1 0 ) : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 INCOME - T AX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), HYDERABAD V/S. SHRI J .APPA RAO, HYDERABAD (PAN ACDPJ 4765 J) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI SOLGY JOSE T.KOTTARAM RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING 06.06.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 .06.2014 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BY THIS APPLICATION UNDER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961, THE REVENUE SEEKS RECTIFICATION/RECALL OF THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 29.11.2013 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATED TO TH E REVENUES APPEAL ITA NO.1533/HYD/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, ON THE GROUND THAT CERTAIN MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RECORD HAVE CREPT INTO THE SAME. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THIS APPLICATION, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, DESPITE N OTICE. HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE - ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE , REITERATING THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION, SUBMITTED THAT ADDI TION OF RS.51,35,000 WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF THE SALE CONSIDERATION BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS BASED ON MA NO.87 /HYD/201 4 (IN ITA NO. 1533 / HYD/201 0 ) SHRI J. APPARAO , HYDERABAD. 2 THE SCRIBBLING ON A LOOSE SHEET FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL, IT IS SUBMITTED, THE CIT(A), OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS DISCLOSED UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LAND, TO THE EXTENT OF RS.37.15 LAKHS, RESTRICTED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO T HAT EXTENT AND DELETED BALANCE FIGURE OF R S.14.20 LAKHS. THE TRIBUNAL, WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, BEING ITA NO.1533/HYD/2010, AGAINST THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT(A), IN PARA 42 OF ITS CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 29.11.2013, ON PAGES 28 THEREOF, HAS INCORRECTLY NOTED THE ADDITIO N DELETED BY THE CIT(A) AS RS.14.20 LAKHS AND ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A) AS RS.37.15 LAKHS. SINCE THIS IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.11.2013 CALLS FOR RECTIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE ABOVE A MOUNTS OF THE ADDITION SUSTAINED/DELETED BY THE CIT(A), AS ULTIMATELY SUSTAINED BY THE TRIBUNAL BY THE SAID ORDER. 4. WE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD IN THE LIGHT OF THE AVERMENTS MADE BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION. WE AGREE WITH THE REVENUE THAT THERE WAS MISTAKE IN MENTIONING THE FIGURES OF ADDITION SUSTAINED/DELETED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH ULTIMATELY STOOD UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL. WE ACCORDINGLY RECTIFY OUR ORDER DATED 29.11.2013 I N SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO APPEAL ITA NO.1533/HYD/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, AND DIRECT RECTIFICATION OF OUR ORDER TO THE EXTENT INDICATED BELOW - ( A ) IN PARA 42 LINE 2, THE AMOUNT RS.14,20,000/ - SHOULD BE READ AS RS.37,15,000 ; ( B ) CONCLUDING PART OF THE LAST SENTENCE OF PARA 43, BEING .RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO RS.14,20,000/ - SHOULD BE READ AS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THAT FIGURE OF RS.37,15,000/ - . MA NO.87 /HYD/201 4 (IN ITA NO. 1533 / HYD/201 0 ) SHRI J. APPARAO , HYDERABAD. 3 ( C ) THE PENULTIMATE SENTENCE OF PARA 44, READING AS - ACCOR D INGLY IN OUR VIEW THE CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.14.20 LAKHS OUT O F TH E TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.51,35,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. S HOULD BE READ AS - ACCORDINGLY IN OUR VIEW THE CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 14 . 20 LAKHS OUT OF THE TOTA L AMOUNT OF RS.51,35,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. TO THE EXTENT OF THE RECTIFICATION OF THE ABOVE THREE MISTAKES IN PARAS 42, 43 AND 44 OF OUR ORDER DATED 29 TH NOVEMBER, 2013, WHICH HAS NO IMPACT ON THE ULTIMATE RESULT O F THE APPEAL IN THE ORD ER PASSED IN APPEAL ITA NO.1533/HYD/2010, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18.06.2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( B.RAMA KOTAIAH) ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED/ - 18T H JUNE, 2014 MA NO.87 /HYD/201 4 (IN ITA NO. 1533 / HYD/201 0 ) SHRI J. APPARAO , HYDERABAD. 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 SHRI J.APPA RAO C/O.SHRI M.CHANDRAMOULSESHWARA RAO, CA, SKYPARK APARTMENTS, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6 (1) , HY DERABAD 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(A) VII , HYDERABAD 4 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CENTRAL , HYDERABAD 5 DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT, HYDERABAD B.V.S