M/s. Pelican Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI v. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2277/CHNY/2016 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2016 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 227721714 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AACCH1963J
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 2277/CHNY/2016
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Pelican Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI
Respondent ITO, CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 26-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Date Of Final Hearing 29-09-2016
Next Hearing Date 29-09-2016
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 02-08-2016
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C B ENCH CHENNAI . ! ' . # % & BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY JUDICI AL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2277/MDS/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) M/S. PELICAN REALTY PROJECTS PVT. LTD. OLD NO.15 NEW NO.31 RAJAMANNAR STREET T.NAGAR CHENNAI -600 017. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER SALARY WARD-IV(3) CHENNAI-34. PAN: AACCH1963J ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. B.RAMAKRISHNAN FCA /RESPONDENT BY : MR. A.V.SREEKANTH JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 29 TH SEPTEMBER 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 TH OCTOBER 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY AM:- THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS)- 3 CHENNAI DATED 30.06.2016 IN ITA NO.149/2014-15/ CIT(A)- 3 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 250(6) OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN ITS A PPEAL HOWEVER THE CRUXES OF THE ISSUES ARE AS FOLLOWS:- (I) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF ` 3 10 019 116/- MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN CLOSING STOCK. II) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE LEARNED 2 ITA NO.2277/MDS/2016 ASSESSING OFFICER TO CHARGE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B & 234C OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DOMESTIC COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF REAL ES TATE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON 30.09.2011 DECLARING LOSS OF ` 4 02 708/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE RETURN WAS REVISED THRICE DECLARING THE SAME INCOME . THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 08.08.2013. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS IT WAS NOTICED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED ITS CLOSING STOCK OF LAND AS RS.36 46 36 184/- AND LOSS OF ` 4 02 708/- IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IN THE NOTES TO ACCOUNTS THE CLOSING STOCK WAS SHOWN AS ` 39 56 55 300/-. ON QUERY IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CORRECT FIGURE IS RS.36 46 36 184/- AND NOT RS.39 56 55 300 /- AS MENTIONED IN THE NOTES TO ACCOUNTS AND FURTHER EXPL AINED THAT THERE WERE CANCELLATION OF SALE FOR RS.3 10 19 116/ - WHICH WAS MISTAKENLY INCLUDED IN THE NOTES TO ACCOUNTS. H OWEVER 3 ITA NO.2277/MDS/2016 THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE SUBMISSI ONS OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED THE CANCELLATION DEED FOR THE SALE OF LAND. 4. ON APPEAL THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESS ING OFFICER BECAUSE EVEN BEFORE HIM NO EVIDENCE WAS PRO DUCED TO ESTABLISH THE CANCELLATION OF THE SALE OF LAND. 5. BEFORE US OUT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THE CANCELLATION DEED AS F RESH EVIDENCE AND REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMIT TED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AD MITTING THE SAME AS ADDITIONAL GROUND. 6. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENT LY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE AND PLEADED THAT THE ORDERS OF THE R EVENUE MAY BE CONFIRMED. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE A DDITIONAL 4 ITA NO.2277/MDS/2016 EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CANCELLING T HE SALE AGREEMENT. IN THIS SITUATION WE ARE OF THE CONSIDE RED VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE AS SESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE REVENUE. THEREFORE W E HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED AS SESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE MATTER AFRE SH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW & MERIT. AS REGARDS THE OTHER G ROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO CHARGING OF I NTEREST U/S. 234B & 234C OF THE ACT WE HEREBY HOLD IT TO BE CONSEQUENTIAL AND ACCORDINGLY THE GROUND IS DISPOSE D OFF. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 26 TH OCTOBER 2016 SD/- SD/- ( ! ' . # ) ( . ) ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) # % / JUDICIAL MEMBER % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /CHENNAI ( /DATED 26 TH OCTOBER 2016 SOMU *+ + /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF