Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “RAIPUR” BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI PAWAN SINGH
सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 12/08/2021 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 13/08/2021 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Raipur (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 19.02.2020 arising in the assessment order dated 31.03.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2013-14.
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:
(Shri Rakesh Chopra vs. DCIT) A.Y. 2013-14 - 2 - “1) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. Assessing Officer treating the impugned bank account as appellant’s personal bank account instead of firm and in making addition of Rs.2,31,942/- on account of interest income accrued on that bank account which was already offered in the firm’s case. 2) In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not following the order of Hon’ble Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not following the order of Hon’ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, Raipur decided in appellant’s favour in appellant’s own case for preceding assessment years.”
We have heard the rival submissions. It is stated on behalf of the assessee that the controversy reveals around addition of Rs.2,31,942/- accrued in savings bank account maintained in the name of a partner of the firm, but, however, used for the purposes of advancement of business of partnership firm. It is further submitted that the interest income accrued in the bank account held in the name of partner has been duly disclosed and accounted for while determining the income of the partnership firm. It is further contended that the similar situation arose in A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 where the dispute on assessment of interest income arose in the hands of partner. The issue was resolved by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in concerning A.Y. 2010- 11 and ITA Nos. 02 & 03/RPR/2017 order dated 11.03.2019 concerning A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 in favour of assessee. It is thus submitted that the issue and controversy being identical to the earlier years, the conclusion drawn in the earlier years be applied for A.Y. 2013-14 in question as well.
The learned DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, submitted that as rightly observed by CIT(A), the assessee has failed to demonstrate that the interest income in question has been included for the purposes of determination of chargeable income of the partnership firm.
(Shri Rakesh Chopra vs. DCIT) A.Y. 2013-14 - 3 - 5. In response, the learned counsel for the assessee fairly submitted that for the limited purpose of ascertainment of fact as to where interest income have been included in the taxable income of the partnership firm, the matter may be remanded to AO of the assessee firm and AO be directed to follow the conclusion drawn by the co-ordinate bench for previous years in assessee’s own case.
Having regard to the factual position noted above and the decision of the co-ordinate bench thereon, the issue is remitted back to the file of the AO for verification as to whether the interest income accrued is assessed in the partnership firm or not. In case the AO is satisfied that the interest income has been duly included and forming part of the computation of income of the partnership firm, namely, Mahaveer Ventures, the AO shall delete the addition in the hands of the partner assessee herein.