THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. AMITAVA SAMANTA,, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITSSA 13/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 March 2023AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in deleting the addition on the ground that the company invested in the property in the assessee's name, especially when the company's appeal concerning the same issue for the same assessment year was pending before the same appellate authority. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). The matter was remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the assessee's appeal along with the pending appeal of M/s. India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd. for Assessment Year 2012-13, ensuring a proper opportunity is given to the assessee. The Tribunal did not decide the merits of the addition itself.

What were the facts?

A search action under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was conducted in the case of India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd. (IGRPL) group on March 15, 2013. The assessee, Amitava Samanta, is a director of IGRPL. Notices under section 153A were issued to the assessee but were returned unserved. During the search, a Development Agreement dated August 15, 2011, was impounded, pertaining to land measuring 34 bighas 4 cottah belonging to the assessee, situated in West Bengal. The assessee stated that the land was purchased by IGRPL in his name and the entire payment was made by the company. However, no details were provided. An ex-parte assessment order was passed under section 144 r.w.s. 153A, adding Rs. 2,44,80,200/- as unaccounted investment. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted this addition, stating that the payment was made by IGRPL and was already subject to addition in IGRPL's hands. The Revenue has appealed this deletion.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,44,80,200/- made on account of unaccounted investment in property, contrary to the Assessing Officer's findings and remand report, and by admitting additional evidence. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Assessee's Contention: None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. CIT(A) incorrectly deleted the addition. The appeal filed by IGRPL for the same Assessment Year 2012-13 is still pending adjudication before the same Ld. CIT(A). Without disposing of the company's appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) should not have granted relief to the assessee on the grounds that the investment was made by IGRPL. The Revenue requested that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide it along with the appeal of M/s. India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 144,Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH

Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member

IT(SS)A No. 13/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year 2012-13

The DCIT, Central Amitava Samanta Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad C/o. India Green Vs Reality Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) A/64-63, Silver Arc, B/h Town Hall, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad PAN: BCQPS4197D (Respondent) Assessee Represented: None Revenue Represented: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 23-03-2023 Date of pronouncement : 29-03-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Revenue as against the Appellate order dated 27.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad, arising out of the Assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2012-13.

I.T(SS)A No. 13/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 DCIT vs. Amitava Samanta

2.

The brief fact of the case is that a search action u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd. Group on 15.03.2013. The assessee is one among the director of the above Company. The assessee was issued with 153A notices which were returned back unserved with postal remark “left” and “No such person on this address and hence not known”.

3.

During the course of survey action in the premises of M/s. India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd., a copy of the Development Agreement dated 15.08.2011 was impounded which is to develop land belonging to the assessee measuring 34 bighas 4 cottah situated in Mouza- Raipur, Kalikapur-II, Sonarpur, Distt. West Bengal.

3.1. During the course of search action, the assessee was asked to explain the source of investment in the above lands. The assessee replied the land was purchased by the company in the name of the assessee and the entire amount was paid by the company. However no details of the transaction was submitted by the assessee. As the assessee was not cooperative by producing any evidences an ex- parte assessment order was passed adding Rs.2,44,80,200/- as unaccounted investment of the assessee.

4.

Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition on the ground that the contention of the assessee that payment towards acquisition of land are made by IGRPL and such payment is already subject matter of addition in the hands of IGRPL, hence no separate addition in the hands of the assessee for the present assessment

I.T(SS)A No. 13/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 3 DCIT vs. Amitava Samanta

year is called for. Thereby the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.2,44,80,200/- and partly allowed the assessee’s appeal.

5.

Aggrieved against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts brought about by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order as well as the objections raised in the remand report and has admitted the additional evidences. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in deleting the addition made on account of unaccounted investment in property of Rs.2,44,80,200/-. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent.

5.1. None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of various hearing notices which has duly served on the assessee.

6.

The Ld. CIT-DR Mr. Vijay Kumar Jaiswal appearing for the Revenue submitted thought the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition but the appeal filed by the IGRPL is still pending adjudication before Ld.CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad vide Appeal No. CIT(A)/Ahd- 13/10515/2016-17 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Without disposing the appeal of the company IGRPL, the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in giving relief to the assessee on the ground the investment is made by the IGRPL. Therefore requested to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remanded the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad to decide along with the above appeal M/s. India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd. vide Appeal No. CIT(A)/Ahd-13/10515/2016-17 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

I.T(SS)A No. 13/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 4 DCIT vs. Amitava Samanta

7.

We have gone through the materials available on record and found that the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in deleting the addition on the ground that the Company has invested in the above property in the name of the assessee, when the company’s appeal is pending for adjudication before the very same Ld. CIT(A)13, Ahmedabad.

8.

In the interest of justice, we thought it fit to set aside the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the appeal along with the appeal filed by M/s. India Green Reality Pvt. Ltd. vide Appeal No. CIT(A)/Ahd-13/10515/2016-17 for the Assessment Year 2012-13, by giving proper opportunity to the assessee.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 29-03-2023

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 29/03/2023 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →