Shri Parasmal Gopawat S/o. Sh. Madanlal Gopawat,, Neemuch v. The I.T.O., Neemuch

CO 5/IND/2010 | 2000-2001
Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 522723 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AATPJ4205D
Bench Indore
Appeal Number CO 5/IND/2010
Duration Of Justice 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant Shri Parasmal Gopawat S/o. Sh. Madanlal Gopawat,, Neemuch
Respondent The I.T.O., Neemuch
Appeal Type Cross Objection
Pronouncement Date 10-12-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 10-12-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 09-12-2010
Next Hearing Date 09-12-2010
Assessment Year 2000-2001
Appeal Filed On 16-04-2010
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.117/IND/2010 A.Y. 2000-01 ITO NEEMUCH APPELLANT VS PARASMAL GOPAWAT NEEMUCH PAN AATPJ 4205 D RESPONDENT AND CO NO.5/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.117/IND/2010) A.Y. 2000-01 PARASMAL GOPAWAT NEEMUCH PAN AATPJ 4205 D APPELLANT VS ITO NEEMUCH RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SH. P.K. MITRA SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER 2 THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS-OBJECTION BY AS SESSEE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-UJJAIN DAT ED 14.12.2009. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN REDUCING THE INTEREST RATE OF 12 % INSTEAD OF 18% APPLIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE AMOUNT OF A DVANCES AS ON 1.4.1999 TO THE TUNE OF RS.2 36 72 060/- ESPECIALLY WHEN THE INTEREST RATE OF 18% WAS APPLIED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 AND WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 9.11.2 007. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL SHRI P.K. MITRA LD. SR. DR WAS PRESENT FOR THE REVENUE WHEREAS NOBODY WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE LETTER OF THE DEPARTMENT DATED 6.12.2010. IN VIEW O F THESE FACTS WE HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PROCEED EXPARTE QUA-ASSESSEE AND T O DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. THE LD. SR. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND ADVANCED HIS ARGUMENTS WHI CH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUNDS RAISED. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. SR. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BRIEF FAC TS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DECLARED NIL INCOME IN ITS RETURN FILED ON 23.11.2000. AS PER THE REVENUE THE ASSESSEE ADVANCED HUGE AMOUNTS TO VARIOUS PERSONS ON LOANS AS WAS EVIDENT FROM THE ACCOUNTS OF THE AS SESSEE. AS PER THE 3 LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AS ON 1.4.1999 THE TOTAL AD VANCES TO THE TUNE OF RS.2 36 72 060/- WERE ADVANCED WHICH WAS NOT RECEIV ED BACK THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AS ON 31.3.2000 THE SAME AMOUN T STANDS. AS PER THE LD. SR. DR THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT REMAINED LENT O UT ON LOANS TO VARIOUS PERSONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED INTEREST @18% WHICH CAME TO RS.42 60 970/- ON THE B ASIS OF INTEREST INCOME OF EARLIER YEARS. THE INTEREST @18% PER ANNU M WAS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL INCOME. ON APPEA L THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS DELETED WHICH IS UNDER CHALLENGE BEFO RE THIS TRIBUNAL. THERE IS A FACTUAL FINDING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER TH AT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95 TO 1998-99 THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE COMP LETED U/S 144. IN REDUCING THE RATE OF INTEREST TO 12% BY THE LD. CIT (A) WAS ON THE REASON THAT IT IS TOWARDS HIGHER SIDE. ADMITTEDLY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER CHARGED NOTIONAL INTEREST FOR WHICH THE REASONING MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NOT PLAUSIBLE BECAUSE FIRSTLY THE EACH YE AR IS INDEPENDENT AND SECONDLY THE BASIS OF EARLIER YEARS MADE BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER IS ALSO NOT CORRECT BECAUSE IN THOSE ASSESSMENT YEARS THE ASSESSMENTS WERE FRAMED U/S 144 OF THE ACT. THERE IS ANOTHER FI NDING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 23.11.2000 DECLARING NIL INCOME AS THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT WAS REC EIVED BACK IN THE PAST ITSELF. THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CLOSE D AND AS PER THE BALANCE-SHEET NOTHING WAS OUTSTANDING AND IN THE B ANK A/C THERE WAS 4 NO TRANSACTION. IN VIEW OF THIS UNCONTROVERTED FIND ING THE STAND OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS AFFIRMED CONSEQUENTLY THIS APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE IS HAVING NO MERIT. SAME IS DISMISSED. 4. AS FAR AS THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED SINCE INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE THE ASSESSEE NE ITHER PRESENTED HIMSELF NOR MOVED ANY ADJOURNMENT PETITION IT SEEMS THAT A SSESSEE HAS NOTHING TO SAY ON ITS CROSS-OBJECTION THEREFORE THE GROUN DS TAKEN IN THE CROSS- OBJECTION ARE DISMISSED. FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE C ROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF L EARNED SR. DR AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 9 TH DECEMBER 2010. (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10.12.2010 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR G UARD FILE !VYAS!