Mr. Rakesh Khanna, New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 251/DEL/2012 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2014 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 25120114 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AHJPK4120D
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 251/DEL/2012
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant Mr. Rakesh Khanna, New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 28-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 25-11-2014
Next Hearing Date 25-11-2014
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 17-01-2012
Judgment Text
ITA NO. 251/ DEL/ 2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. N O. 251/DEL/2012 A.Y . : 2005 - 06 RAKESH KHANNA H - 11 CONNAUGHT PLACE NEW DELHI 110 001 (PAN: AHJPK4120D) VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 33(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. VISHAL KALRA ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SH. VIKRAM SAHAY SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 25 - 11 - 2014 DATE OF ORDER : 28 - 11 - 2014 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : J M TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - XVIII NEW DELHI DATED 31 . 1 0 .201 1 P ERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 0 6. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE NOTICE DATED 17.9.2009 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE I.T. ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME THE ASSESSEE REQ UESTED THE AO TO TREAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN AS RETURN FILED IN PURSUANCE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE I.T. ACT. THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO FOR INITIATING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT WHILE MAKING THE REASSESSMENT THE AO TRAVELLED ITA NO. 251/ DEL/ 2012 2 BEYOND THE SCOPE OF REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT AND PROC EEDED TO MAKE EXTENSIVE ENQUIRIES ON ISSUES NOT CONNECTED WITH THE REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT AND MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANC ES TO THE INCOME OF THE RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION IN RELATION TO THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT REASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS WERE IN I TIATED TO MAKE ROVING AND FISHING ENQUIRIES AND WITH NO COGENT REASONS WITH THE AO THAT THE INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO COMPLETED THE REASSESSMENT BEYOND HIS JURISDICTION AND THE SAME DESERVES TO BE CANCELLED. HE ALSO REQUESTED THAT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.12.2006 PASSED U/S. 147/143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT AS WELL AS THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED MAY BE CANCELLED I N VIEW OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS WHICH INCLUDES RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. VS. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (DEL.); CIT VS. JET AIRWAYS INDIA LTD. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (BOM); CIT VS. DR. DEVENDRA GUPTA (2011) 336 ITR 59 (RAJ.); CIT VS. KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD. 99 (2002) DELHI LAW TIMES 221 (FB); CIT VS. USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD. (2012) 348 ITR 485 (DELHI) AND WE L INTERTRADE PVT. LTD. AND ANR. VS. ITO (2009) 308 ITR 22 (DELHI). 2.1 ON THE CONTRARY LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH US ESPECIALLY THE DECISIONS. WE HAVE THOROUGHLY GONE THROUGH THE JUDGMENTS /DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURTS WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED BEFORE US. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE AO HAD TRAVELLED BEYOND THE SCOPE OF REASONS RECORDED BEFORE THE OPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. BECAUSE AO DID NOT MAKE ANY ADDITION IN RELATION TO THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. WE ITA NO. 251/ DEL/ 2012 3 HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO ON 16.9.2009 AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AO HAS NOT MADE ANY ADDITION IN RELATION TO THE REASONS RECORDED BY HIM ON 16.9.2009. THEREFORE THE REOPENING OF AS SESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IS BEYOND THE JURISDICTION IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS STATED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AS MENTIONED IN PARA NO. 2 AT PAGE. 2 OF THIS ORDER. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE MENTIONED PRECEDENTS AS DISCUSSED IN PARA NO. 2 OF THIS ORDER WE HEREBY DECLARE THE REASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION BAD IN LAW VOID ABNITIO AND ACCORDINGLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS HERBEY CANCELLED. 4 . IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE O PEN C OURT ON 28 / 11 /20 1 4 . SD/ - SD/ - [ G.D. AGRAWAL ] [ H.S. SIDHU ] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 28 / 11 /201 4 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 251/ DEL/ 2012 4