Smt. K.R.Lakshmiammal, Rajapalayam v. ITO, Virudhunagar

ITA 1075/CHNY/1999 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 107521714 RSA 1999
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 1075/CHNY/1999
Duration Of Justice 11 year(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant Smt. K.R.Lakshmiammal, Rajapalayam
Respondent ITO, Virudhunagar
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 13-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 13-08-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 10-08-2010
Next Hearing Date 10-08-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 19-07-1999
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER .. I.T.A. NO. 1452/MDS.1998 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1984-85 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-I(2) VIRUDHUNAGAR. V. SMT. K.R. LAKSHMIAMMAL 171 KOTHANAR STREET RAJAPALAYAM. PAN/GIR NO. 3724-L AND I.T.A. NO. 1075/MDS/1999 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1984-85 SMT. K.R. LAKSHMIAMMAL V. THE INCOME-TAX O FFICER RAJAPALAYAM. WARD-I(2) VIRUDHUNAGAR. (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B. SRINIVAS ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR O R D E R PER BENCH: ITA NO. 1452/MDS/MDS/98 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) MADURAI IN APPEA L NO.ITA 69/97-98 DATED 26- 3-1998 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1984-85. ITA NO. 10 75/MDS/99 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEAR NED CIT(A) MADURAI IN APPEAL I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 2 NO. 69/97-98 DATED 26-03-1998 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 1984-85. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DELAYE BY 50 DAYS FOR WHIC H THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 13-10-2000 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE DELAY HAD OCCURRED IN THE HANDS OF THE AUDITOR WHO HAD FILED THE APPEAL. AS IT WAS SATISFIED THAT THE DELAY IS UNINTENTIONAL THE DELA Y IS CONDONED AND THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS HEARD ON MERITS. 2. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENG ED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN DELETING THE INTEREST LEVIED UNDE R SECTIONS 217 AND 319(8) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961. 3. SHRI B. SRINIVAS DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E REVENUE AND SHRI S.SRIDHAR ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE LEAR NED CIT(A) HAD FAILED TO FOLLOW THE DECISION OF THE FULL BENCH OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LALLY JACOB V. ITO REPORTED IN 197 ITR 439 WHEREIN THE H ON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT HAD HELD THAT IF THE ASSESSMENT IS MADE FOR THE FIR ST TIME BY RESORT TO SECTION 147 THE SAID ASSESSMENT WOULD BE A REGULAR ASSESSMENT F OR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION217 OF THE ACT. 5. IN REPLY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE S UBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HON 'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHARLES DSOUZA V. CIT REPORTED IN 147 ITR 694 AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRAKASH LAL KHANDELWAL V ITO REPORTED IN I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 3 180 ITR 604 AND THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PADMA TIMBER DEPOT REPORTED IN 169 ITR 646 WHEREIN IT HAD BEEN CATEGORICALLY HELD THAT AN ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) R EAD WITH SECTION 147 OR 144 READ WITH SECTION 147 WAS NOT A REGULAR ASSESSMENT BEFORE THE AMENDMENT WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.1985. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE WAS ASSESSMENT YEAR 1984-85 AND CONSEQUENTL Y NO INTEREST U/S. 139(8) OR 217 WAS LEVIABLE AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD RIGH TLY DELETED THE LEVY. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT EVEN OTHERWISE IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD . REPORTED IN 88 ITR 192 IF TWO REASONABLE CONSTRUCTIONS ARE POSSIBLE THAT FAVO URABLE TO THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE PREFERRED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THOUGH TH E KERALA HIGH COURT HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THERE WERE DECISIONS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD . THE DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED. HE VEHEM ENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE HA VE ALSO PERUSED THE DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF LALLY JACOB HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHARLES DSOUZA HON'BLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PADMA TIMBER DEPOT AND TH E HONBLE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRAKASH LAL KHANDELVAL REFERRED TO SUPRA. IT IS NOTICED THAT IN THE I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 4 DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF LALLY JACOB THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT HAS TAKEN THE VIEW THAT THE AMEND MENT MADE BY THE TAXATION LAWS (AMENDMENT) ACT 1984 WHEREIN SECTION 215(6) W AS ADDED WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.1985 WAS ONLY CLARIFICATORY IN NATURE AND WITHOUT THE SAID PROVISION EVEN IF THE REASSESSMENT IS THE FIRST ASSESSMENT TH EN IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AS A REGULAR ASSESSMENT. IN REGARD TO TH E DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHARLES DSOUZA THE ISSUE OF THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN BY THE SUB-SECTION (6) TO SECT ION 215 WAS NOT BEFORE THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT INSOFAR AS THE JUDGMEN T WAS RENDERED ON 27.1.1984 WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS CATEGO RICALLY HELD THAT ASSESSMENTS U/S. 143(3)/144 FALL UNDER A DISTINCT C ATEGORY OF ASSESSMENTS AND THE ASSESSMENTS MADE U/S. 147 ARE NOT COVERED BY TH E EXPRESSION REGULAR ASSESSMENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2(4) AS IT STOOD THEN. A PERUSAL OF THE DECISION OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PAD MA TIMBER DEPOT AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRA KASH LAL KHANDELWAL CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 139(8) HAD B EEN ADDED W.E.F. 1.4.1985. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CENTRAL PR OVINCES MANGANESE ORE CO. LTD. V. CIT REPORTED IN 160 ITR 961 HAD HELD THAT T HE LEGISLATURE HAD MADE THE EXPLANATION EFFECTIVE FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1985- 86 AND DID NOT APPLY TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS PRECEDING IT. CONSEQUENTLY IT HAD BEEN HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT MADE U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 W AS NOT A REGULAR I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 5 ASSESSMENT AND CONSEQUENTLY THERE COULD BE NO LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 139(8) AND 217 OF THE ACT. THUS WE ARE FACED WITH TWO VIEWS E XPRESSED BY VARIOUS HIGH COURTS. IN SUCH A SITUATION THE HON'BLE SUPREME C OURT IN THE CASE OF VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD. HAS CATEGORICALLY HELD THAT IF TWO RE ASONABLE CONSTRUCTIONS OF TAXING PROVISIONS ARE POSSIBLE THAT CONSTRUCTION WHICH FA VOURS THE ASSESSEE MUST BE ADOPTED. HERE IT IS NOTICED THAT TWO REASONABLE CO NSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OF THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 139(8) AND 217 OF THE ACT BY VARIOUS HON'BLE HIGH COURTS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW T HAT RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD. CITED SUPRA THE REASONABLE CONSTRUCTION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IS TO BE ADOPTED. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DONE ONLY THIS BY FOLLOWING THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHARLES DS OUZA AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F PADMA TIMBER DEPOT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE FIND ING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE IS ON A RIGHT FOOTING AND DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 7. IN REGARD TO THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT IN THE COURS E OF ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT THE CREDIT OF ` . 4 02 000/- AS APPEARING ON 31.8.1983 WAS FROM THE SALE OF JEWELLERY. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT ANOTHER SUM OF ` . 45 000/- WAS ALSO CREDITED ON THE SAME DATE WHICH W AS FROM THE SALE PROCEEDS I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 6 OF SILVERWARES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE CRE DITS OF ` . 4 47 000/- REPRESENTING THE SALE OF JEWELLERY AND SILVERWARES IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAD TREA TED THE SAME AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HIMSELF HAD ACCEPTED THE WEALTH TAX RETURN OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 1984-85 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED THE JEWELLERY. IT WAS THE SU BMISSION THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD GIVEN AN ESTIMATED RELIEF OF 1/3 RD OF THE ADDITION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO OTHER BUSINESS NOR WAS ANY SOURCE OF INCOME FOUND IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE OTHER THA N AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ADDITION WAS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 8. IN REPLY THE LEARNED DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED TH E ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) . IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY THE LEARNED DR TH AT THE REVENUE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN GRANTING RELIEF OF 1/3 RD OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS NOTICED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAD CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY MATERIAL TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM THAT THE CRE DITS APPEARING IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE FROM THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE JEWELLER Y AND SILVERWARE AS DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FULL. IT WAS UNDER THESE CIRCUM STANCES THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD RESTRICTED THE RELIEF TO 1/3 RD OF THE CREDITS. EVEN BEFORE US THE I.T.A. NOS.1452/MDS/98 & 1075/MDS/99 7 ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE FINDING AS ARRIVED AT BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS PERVERSE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE IS ON A RIGHT FOOTING AND DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. IN THE CIR CUMSTANCES THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 11. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13-08- 2010. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 13TH AUGUST 2010. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE