Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal is against an order by the CIT(A) partly confirming the AO's order passed under Section 147/143(3). The grounds raised relate to the validity of reassessment proceedings and the non-grant of credit for tax demand recovered.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the merits of the case had already been decided in favor of the assessee in a prior appeal. Therefore, the challenge to the validity of reassessment was considered academic and dismissed. The issue of non-grant of credit was allowed for statistical purposes with a direction to the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the reassessment proceedings were valid and whether the assessee was entitled to credit for tax recovered through adjustment.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3), 148, 234A, 234B, 271(1)(c), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANTBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANTBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARYSHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARYSHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 13.05.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax 13.05.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income 13.05.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income (Appeals)-19, New Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2013-14, raising following grounds: 14, raising following grounds:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals XIX, New the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals XIX, New the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals XIX, New Delhi ('learned CIT(A)') has erred in passing an Delhi ('learned CIT(A)') has erred in passing an order under order under section ('u/s') 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), partly section ('u/s') 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), partly section ('u/s') 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), partly confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 17(1), New Delhi ('learned AO') u/s Income Tax, Circle 17(1), New Delhi ('learned AO') u/s Income Tax, Circle 17(1), New Delhi ('learned AO') u/s 147/143(3) for the subject AY, 147/143(3) for the subject AY, Ground No. 1 Ground No. 1- Proceedings u/s 147 of the Act 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the ground that the learned CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the ground that the learned CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the ground that the learned AO has erred in initiating proceedings under section the learned AO has erred in initiating proceedings under section the learned AO has erred in initiating proceedings under section 147 of the Act and passing the order under section 147 of the Act and passing the order under section 143(3) read 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. with section 147 of the Act. 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in initiating the proceedings law, the learned AO has erred in initiating the proceedings law, the learned AO has erred in initiating the proceedings under section 147 of the Act and in issuing notice under section under section 147 of the Act and in issuing notice under section under section 147 of the Act and in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act alleging esc 148 of the Act alleging escapement of income and hence, the apement of income and hence, the notice under section 148 of the act is bad in law and void ab notice under section 148 of the act is bad in law and void ab notice under section 148 of the act is bad in law and void ab- initio. 1.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 1.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in 1.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in issuing notice under section law, the learned AO has erred in issuing notice under section law, the learned AO has erred in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, without havin 148 of the Act, without having any valid reasons for initiation of g any valid reasons for initiation of the proceedings under section 147 of the Act and hence the the proceedings under section 147 of the Act and hence the the proceedings under section 147 of the Act and hence the notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and void ab notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and void ab notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and void ab- initio. 1.3. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the 1.3. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the 1.3. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case an circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred d in law, the learned AO has erred in continuing with the re in continuing with the re-assessment proceedings under section assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act, before serving a speaking order, disposing off 147 of the Act, before serving a speaking order, disposing off 147 of the Act, before serving a speaking order, disposing off the objections raised by the Appellant against initiation of the the objections raised by the Appellant against initiation of the the objections raised by the Appellant against initiation of the re- assessment proceedings. assessment proceedings. Grounds 2, 3 and 4 are without prejudice to Ground 1 rounds 2, 3 and 4 are without prejudice to Ground 1 rounds 2, 3 and 4 are without prejudice to Ground 1 Ground No. 2- - Non-grant of demand recovered earlier 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not granting credit for INR the learned CIT(A) has erred in not granting credit for INR the learned CIT(A) has erred in not granting credit for INR
17,226,409 which represents 17,226,409 which represents tax demand raised vide original tax demand raised vide original assessment order for the subject AY and recovered from the assessment order for the subject AY and recovered from the assessment order for the subject AY and recovered from the Appellant by way of adjustment against refund for AY 2005 Appellant by way of adjustment against refund for AY 2005 Appellant by way of adjustment against refund for AY 2005-06.
Ground No. 3 Ground No. 3- Levy of Interest under section 234A and 234B of Levy of Interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act 3. On the facts and in the circ 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, umstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred upholding the order of the learned the learned CIT(A) has erred upholding the order of the learned the learned CIT(A) has erred upholding the order of the learned AO with respect to levying and computing interest under section AO with respect to levying and computing interest under section AO with respect to levying and computing interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act. 234A and 234B of the Act. Ground No. 4 Ground No. 4 - Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, cts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, cts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the ground of appeal the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the ground of appeal the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the ground of appeal in relation to initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the in relation to initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the in relation to initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the learned AO holding that the ground learned AO holding that the ground is premature.
2. At the outset, the At the outset, the Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted for the assessee submitted that the additions involved in the appeal have already been decided that the additions involved in the appeal have already been decided that the additions involved in the appeal have already been decided in favor of the assessee on merit by the Tribunal in favor of the assessee on merit by the Tribunal in in favor of the assessee on merit by the Tribunal in 4725/Del/2013. As a result, the grounds raised regarding the . As a result, the grounds raised regarding the . As a result, the grounds raised regarding the validity of the reassessment are now purely academic. In view of the reassessment are now purely academic. In view of the reassessment are now purely academic. In view of the submissions made by both parties, since the merits of the case have submissions made by both parties, since the merits of the case have submissions made by both parties, since the merits of the case have already been decided in favor of the assessee, the challenge to the already been decided in favor of the assessee, the challenge to the already been decided in favor of the assessee, the challenge to the validity of the reassessment does not require adjudication at this validity of the reassessment does not require adjudication at this validity of the reassessment does not require adjudication at this stage and is left open for consideration at an appropriate stage. stage and is left open for consideration at an appropriate stage. stage and is left open for consideration at an appropriate stage. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 is dismissed Accordingly, Ground No. 1 is dismissed.
With respect to Ground No. 2, the Learned Counsel 3. With respect to Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee submitted that the Learned CIT(A) did not grant credit for did not grant credit for the refund adjusted a the refund adjusted against the demand. Therefore, he requested gainst the demand. Therefore, he requested that the Assessing Officer Assessing Officer be directed to grant the necessary credit. be directed to grant the necessary credit. In our opinion, the assessee should file an appropriate rectification In our opinion, the assessee should file an appropriate In our opinion, the assessee should file an appropriate application before the Assessing Officer to address this grievance. before the Assessing Officer to address this grievance. before the Assessing Officer to address this grievance. However, for the disposal of this ground, we also direct the er, for the disposal of this ground, we also direct the er, for the disposal of this ground, we also direct the Assessing Officer to consider any such application filed by the to consider any such application filed by the to consider any such application filed by the assessee in accordance with the provisions of the law and grant due assessee in accordance with the provisions of the law and grant due assessee in accordance with the provisions of the law and grant due credit for the tax collected via refund after conducting the necessary credit for the tax collected via refund after conducting the necessa credit for the tax collected via refund after conducting the necessa verification. Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes.
The ground No. 3 is consequential, whereas ground no. 4 is 3. The ground No. 3 is consequential, whereas ground no. 4 is 3. The ground No. 3 is consequential, whereas ground no. 4 is premature, hence same are not required to be adjudicated and premature, hence same are not required to be adjudicated and premature, hence same are not required to be adjudicated and dismissed as infructuous. dismissed as infructuous.
The appeal of the asse The appeal of the assessee is accordingly partly allowed for partly allowed for statistical purposes. .