M/s Kanishka Paper & Pulp P. Ltd.,, Hyderabad v. ACIT, Hyderabad

ITA 901/HYD/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 90122514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AACCK5511F
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 901/HYD/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant M/s Kanishka Paper & Pulp P. Ltd.,, Hyderabad
Respondent ACIT, Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 07-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 07-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 08-12-2010
Next Hearing Date 08-12-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 14-06-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A' HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.901/HYD/10 : ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 M/S. KANISHKA PAPER AND PULP P. LTD. HYDERABAD ( PAN AACCK 5511 F ) V/S. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 2(1) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.V.N.CHARYA O R D E R PER G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX(APPEALS). 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER- '1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX(APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) ER RED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.72 54 000 MADE U/S. 6 8. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) F AILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT DOUBTED THE IDENTITY OF THE INVESTORS AND THEREFORE OUGHT T O HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION SINCE PROVING THE IDENTITY IS ENOUGH I N CASE OF INVESTMENT AS SHARE CAPITAL. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT T HAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE INVESTORS ON HIS OWN NOR HAS CALLED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THEM FOR EXA MINATION TO VERIFY THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CONFIRMATIONS AND THE REBY ERRED IN ITA NO.901./HYD/10 M/S. KANISHKA PAPER AND PULP P. LTD. HYD 2 CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MERELY ON THE BASIS OF CONF IRMATORY LETTERS HOLDING THAT THE INVESTORS ARE NOT CREDIT W ORTHY. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE F ACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS PASSED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF M IND AND IT WAS ONLY REPRODUCTION OF REPORT OF ONE OF THE EXECU TIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THEREFORE OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION. ' 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE ENTIRE MATERIAL PRODUCED BY IT IN THE COMPILATION FILED BEFO RE THE TRIBUNAL WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A). HOWEV ER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE SAME AND HAS NOT VERIFIED THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CONFIRMATIONS FILED BY THE INVESTORS AND NO SUFFICI ENT OPPORTUNITY WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE HAS OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E AND HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT (A). HE SUBMITTED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE A ND THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) HAVE PASSED SPEAKING ORDERS ON TH E ISSUE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED TO A SPECIFIC GROUND OF APPEAL I.E. GROUND OF APPEAL NO.4 EXTRACTED ABOVE WHICH IS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE INVESTORS ON HIS OWN NOR CALLED THE A SSESSEE TO PRODUCE THEM FOR EXAMINATION TO VERIFY THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CO NFIRMATIONS. ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED DOCUMENTS/COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COMPILATION SUBMITTED BEFORE U S. IN THESE FACTS OF THE CASE WE HOLD THAT IT SHALL BE IN THE INTERESTS OF J USTICE TO SET ASIDE THE ISSUE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE F ILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE SAME DE NOVO I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED/OR TO BE PRODUCED BY T HE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CASE. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION WITH REGARD TO GROUND OF APPEAL NO.4 OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO ADJUDICATE UPON ITA NO.901./HYD/10 M/S. KANISHKA PAPER AND PULP P. LTD. HYD 3 OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AND OU R OBSERVATIONS IN THIS ORDER SHALL NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPE AL. 5. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7.11.2011 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (G.C.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DT/- 7TH JANUARY 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. KANISHKA PAPER AND PULP P. LTD. C/O. SHRI A. V.RAGHU RAM ADVOCATE 610 6TH FLOOR BABUKHAN ESTATE BASHEERBAGH HYDERABAD 2. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 2(1) HYDERA BAD 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-III HYDERABAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX II HYDERABAD 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT HYDERABAD. B.V.S