ITO 7(3)2, MUMBAI v. M/S. UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT. LTD.,, MUMBAI

ITA 471/MUM/2011 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2014 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 47119914 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAACU8782C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 471/MUM/2011
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant ITO 7(3)2, MUMBAI
Respondent M/S. UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT. LTD.,, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 26-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 26-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 26-11-2014
Next Hearing Date 26-11-2014
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 17-01-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALF BENCH MUMB AI ! ' BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA AM ITA NOS.471/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS-2007-08 INCOME-TAX OFFICER-7(3)2 ROOM NO.616 6 TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI-400020 # # # # / VS. M/S UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT LTD. IEWPDL G-16 GROUND FLOOR R.R. HOSESJERY BLD. SHRI LAXMI WOLLEN MILL COMPOUND OPP. SHAKTI MILL COMPOUND OFF. DR.E. MOSES ROAD MAHALAXMI MUMBAI-400011 $ ! ./ PAN :AAACU8782C ( / REVENUE ) .. ( %&$' / RESPONDENT ) ( ) / REVENUE BY: SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA %&$' ( ) / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI APURV GAN DHI # ( *+! / DATE OF HEARING 26/11/2014 - ( *+! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26/11/2014 . / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH JM: THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 21/09/2010 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY MU MBAI ON THE GROUND WHETHER THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX 2 M/S UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT LTD.. (APPEALS) WAS RIGHT IN ACCEPTING NEW EVIDENCE IN CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF INCOME-TAX RULES 1962 EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS AND AUDITORS CERTIFICATE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. DR SHRI PAWAN KUMA R BEERLA DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER BY ASSERTING THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) ADMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE CONTRAVENING RULE 46A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDI TORS CERTIFICATE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THUS I T IS A VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS THE AS SESSING OFFICER WAS NOT PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY. ON THE OTHER HAND SHRI APURV GANDHI LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DEF ENDED THE CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A AS THE ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) WAS DULY SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR HIS COMMENT AND IN TURN THE ASSESSING OFFICER SEND THE REMAND REPORT WHICH WAS DULY CONSIDERED. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND P ERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS IN BR IEF ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY DECLARED NIL INCOME. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT) ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS.11 14 00 000/- . THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED LOAN OF RS.11 3 M/S UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT LTD.. CRORES FROM ITS HOLDING COMPANY I.E. EWDPL INDIA PV T. LTD. APART FROM THIS LOAN THE HOLDING COMPANY (EWDPL) A LSO MADE PAYMENT OF RS.7 CRORES TO DELHIWALA REAL ESTAT E PVT. LTD. ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID AMOUNT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY REPAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO EWDPL. THUS AN AMOUNT OF RS.18 CRORES WAS RECEIVED FROM EWDPL AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE PAYMENT OF RS.7 CRORES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AN AMOUNT OF RS.11 CRORES REMAINED OUTSTANDING AS O N 31/03/2007. THE SAID AMOUNT WAS DISCLOSED AS LOAN FROM HOLDING COMPANY IN SCHEDULE-2 RELATING TO UNSECUR ED LOAN IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE LIKEWISE THE AMOU NT OF RS.11 CRORES DUE FROM THE ASSESSEE WAS INCLUDED UNDER T HE HEAD LOAN TO SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES IN SCHEDULE-9 RELAT ING TO LOAN AND ADVANCES IN THE ACCOUNTS OF HOLDING COMPANY. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED CONF IRMATION FROM THE HOLDING COMPANY ALONGWITH LEDGER ACCOUNT O F THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF THE HOLDING COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS HOLDING COMPANY MAINTAINED SEPARATE ACCO UNTS IN THEIR BOOKS PERTAINING TO ADVANCES AS LOAN AND AMOU NT PAID ON BEHALF I.E. THE AMOUNT OF RS.11 CRORES & 7 CRORE S WERE SEPARATELY MAINTAINED. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER M ADE ADDITION OF RS.7 CRORES TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSE SSEE U/S 68 OF THE ACT AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT ON THE GROUND THAT IN THE NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE HOLDING COMPANY THE A MOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS ADVANCED WAS SHOWN AT RS.18 CRORES. ON 4 M/S UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT LTD.. APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 2.2. HOWEVER BEFORE US THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE PERTAINS TO ONLY CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES THEREFORE WE ARE PROCEEDING TO D ISPOSE OF THE APPEAL LIMITED TO THE GROUND RAISED BEFORE US. WE NOTE THAT BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS REMANDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT POINTED OUT ANY SPECIFIC DISCREPANCY WITH RESPECT TO THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE VIS--VIS EWDPL INDIA (P.) LTD. AFTER MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION FROM BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BANK STATEMENTS OF THE CONCERNED PARTI ES. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF THE RULES AS HAS BEEN CANVASSED BY THE LD. DR CONSEQUENTLY WE FIND NO INFIRMITY I N THE CONCLUSION DRAWN BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITH RESPECT TO THE GROUND RAISED BEFORE US. SINCE NO GROUND WAS RAISED BY THE REVENUE UPON THE MERIT OF THE CASE AND JUSTIFICATION FOR DELETING THE ADDITION MA DE U/S 68 WE REFRAIN OURSELVES TO COMMENT UPON THE SAME. FIN ALLY WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WITH RES PECT TO THE GROUND RAISED. THE STAND OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS AFFIR MED WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPUGNED GROUND. FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5 M/S UDAIPUR TREASURE MARKET CITY PVT LTD.. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN TH E PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVE FROM BOTH SIDES AT T HE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 26 TH NOVEMBER 2014. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) ( JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; /# DATED.- 26/11/2014 F{X~{T? P.S/. # . . . . . . ( (( ( %*0 %*0 %*0 %*0 1 0-* 1 0-* 1 0-* 1 0-* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $' / THE APPELLANT 2. %&$' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 2 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED MUMBAI 4. 2 / CIT CONCERNED MUMBAI 5. 03 %*# / DR ITAT MUMBAI E BENCH 6. 45 6 / GUARD FILE. .# .# .# .# / BY ORDER &0* %* //TRUE COPY// 7 77 7 / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI.