VIKRANT YADAV,ETAWAH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(5), ETAWAH, ETAWAH

ITA 78/AGR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals by assessees Vikrant Yadav, Dileep Yadav, and Sukrant Yadav, who are partners in a firm named M/s Rajeev Kumar Contractor. The appeals were against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra, which were based on assessments framed by the Assessing Officer under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act. The primary legal issue was the validity of the reopening of the assessments for the Assessment Year 2006-07, which was challenged on the grounds of being time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the reopening notice was issued beyond the statutory period of six years, leading to the quashing of the assessments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126500 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Rajeev Kumar Contractor
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDER SHRIVASTAVA LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: GAURAV GOYAL; LD
• Keywords: Commissioner; Partners; Commissioner of Income Tax; Deleted; Admission
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.78/Agr/2024 (िनधा \u0010रणवष\u0010 / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Vikrant Yadav Krishna Nagar, Bharthana Road, Etawah (UP)-206001. बनाम/ Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(2)(5), Etawah. \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AIRPY-5887-C (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.79/Agr/2024 (िनधा \u0010रणवष\u0010 / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Dileep Yadav Krishna Nagar, Bharthana Road, Etawah (UP)-206001. बनाम/ Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(2)(5), Etawah. \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABDPY-9221-D (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.236/Agr/2024 (िनधा \u0010रणवष\u0010 / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Sukrant Yadav Krishna Nagar, Bharthana Road, Etawah (UP)-206001. बनाम/ Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(2)(5), Etawah. \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AMEPY-2777-Q (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Gaurav Goyal, CA – Ld. AR थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19-02-2025 / 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Facts as well as issues in captioned appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2006-07 are quite identical. The three assessees are partners in a 2 firm by the name M/s Rajeev Kumar Contractor. First, we take up appeal ITA No.78/Agr/2024 which arises out of an order passed by of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Agra [CIT(A)] on 30-11-2018 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 30-11-2017. The registry has noted delay of 5 years and 3 months, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation petition which is supported by an affidavit of the earlier counsel of the assessee. The Ld. AR also stated that the assessment is time barred and therefore, liable to be quashed. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the admission of the appeal. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case record, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2. Upon perusal of opening paragraph of assessment order, it could be seen that the assessee’s case was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 02-11-2016 which is beyond 6 years from AY 2006-07. Apparently, the Ld. AO has reopened the case of the assessee by interpreting the decision of Tribunal in the case of firm (M/s Rajeev Kumar Contractor) in which the assessee acted as a partner. Initially, the addition of capital introduction was made in the hands of the firm which was deleted by the Tribunal vide ITA No.140/Agr/2014 order dated 04-02-2016 with the observation that Ld. AO would be at liberty to take this matter in the case of individual partners in accordance with the law. This is very clear from these observations that the case could be reopened only if permitted under law. The undisputed fact that emerges is that the notice has been issued beyond 6 years and therefore, the assessment is clearly time barred. Under these circumstances, we condone the delay in the appeal and allow the legal ground thus raised by the assessee. The assessment 3 stand quashed on this ground alone. Delving into other grounds has been rendered mere academic in nature. The appeal stand allowed. 3. Facts in other two appeals quite similar. Applying the same reasoning, the assessment for both these assessees stand quashed. Both these assessees succeed on legal ground. 4. All the appeals stand allowed. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) =ा ियक सद> /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद> /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22.04.2025 आदेश की @ितिलिप अBेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु3/CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड9फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AGRA "