MEENABEN MANIBHAI PARMAR,BHARUCH V. .ITO, WARD-1(1), BHARUCH

ITA 825/SRT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Meenaben Manibhai Parmar, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which arose from an assessment order passed under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant had mistakenly obtained two PANs and reported income from commissions with one PAN, while the other was surrendered. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148, leading to a reassessment and addition of income. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not verify the facts properly and directed corrective measures.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472206 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: SAKAR SHARMA
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत Ɋायपीठ, सूरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 825/SRT/2024 (AY 2010-11) (Hybrid hearing) Meenaben Manibhai Parmar Piludra New Street, Post. Piludra, Jambusar, Bharuch-392 110 [PAN : AGOPP 1943 K] बनाम Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bharuch, Income-tax Office, Hari Kunj, Station Road, Bharuch-356 069 अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ /Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Sakar Sharma, AR राजˢ की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Mukesh Jain– Sr-DR अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal instituted on 06.08.2024 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 04.12.2024 उद ्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of pronouncement 17.12.2024 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short to as “NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)] dated 28.06.2024 for assessment year (AY) 2010-11, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 10.10.2017. 2. Rival submission of both the parties heard and record perused. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that due to mistake assessee obtained two PAN being such Nos.AGOPP1943K and AGOPPP1998C. During the relevant financial year, the assessee earned commission income from Life Insurance Corporation of India. The said ITA No.825/SRT/2024 (A.Y.10-11) Meenaben M Parmar 2 commissions income was reflected in Form-26AS in PAN: AGOPP 1943 K. The assessee filed her return of income for assessment year 2010-11 declaring income of Rs.2,66,585/- after claiming deduction under Chapter-VIA Rs. 68,410/-. The assessee offered net taxable income of Rs.1,98,175/-. The assessee also claimed refund of Rs. 80,500/-. The return was processed and assessee was allowed refund. The said return was filed under PAN AGOPP 1943 K. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 dated 29.03.3017. In response to notice under section 148, assessee filed her reply on 11.10.2017 and submitted that she has already filed income tax return in her PAN AGOPP1943K and has already received refund of Rs.93,170/- while cheque No.996674 which has already credited in her bank account with Dena Bank, Pilubra Jamsusar, Bharuch. The assessee further submitted that due to mistake she has obtained two PAN, one PAN: AGOPP1998C has already surrendered to the office of Income-tax Bharuch, which has been cancelled. The assessee further stated that her PAN AOGPPP 1943 K is continued. The copy of return along with return for assessment year 2010-11 with computation of income and detail of refund is placed on record. The copy of refund filed before Assessing Officer is also on 11.10.2017 is also placed on record. The Assessing Officer instead of taking corrective measures proceeded for re-assessment and completed assessment under section 144 /147 on 10.10.2017 by making addition of Rs.9,05,840/-. The ld AR of the assessee submits that once the income for particular assessment is completed and refund is issued, the same income cannot be taxed again. Before Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A) assessee reiterated her submission. The ld AR of the ITA No.825/SRT/2024 (A.Y.10-11) Meenaben M Parmar 3 assessee submits that despite recording her submission, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer by taking view that no proof is produced by assessee to substantiate the fact that old PAN AGOPP1998C was not in use and no return of income was filed by assessee in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that lower authorities have not verified the fact despite bringing all facts in their notice and his appeal may be allowed. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr-DR) for the Revenue submits that that on going through all the documentary evidence filed by assessee and order of lower authorities and he would submit that Bench may pass proper direction to the Assessing Officer. 4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through order of lower authorities carefully. On careful perusal of odder of lower authorities, we find that in response to notice issued under section 148, the assessee vide her letter dated 11.10.2017 informed the Assessing Officer about surrendering her other PAN AGOPP 1998 C, against which notice under section 148 was issued. We find that assessee has also placed copy of return filed in PAN AGOPP 1943 K. The return was processed and refund was received. Thus, it is a clear case of duplicate PAN. We find that assessee has already surrendered her old PAN AGOPP 1998 C. The Assessing Officer has not verified the facts before completing assessment and made addition in the assessment order. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer by taking view that the assessee has not given any evidence that old PAN AGOPP 1998 C was disuse. No negative evidence cannot be adduced by the party. Considering the ITA No.825/SRT/2024 (A.Y.10-11) Meenaben M Parmar 4 overall facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the Assessing Officer to verify the fact that the income which was allegedly the basis of reopening is already offered and taxed by the department or not and to delete the addition if the same receipt was the basis of reopening. The assessing Officer to initiate action to deactivate of assessee other PAN AGOPP 1998 C. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17/12/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (PAWAN SINGH) लेखा सद˟/Accountant Member Ɋाियक सद˟/Judicial Member सूरत / Surat Dated: 17/12/2024 Dkp Outsourcing Sr.P.S* आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant  ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent  आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT  िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, सूरत/ DR, ITAT, SURAT  गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File By order/आदेश से, // True Copy // सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत "