SMT. SUSHILA DEVI AGRAWAL,RAIGARH(CG) vs. THE ITO - 1, RAIGARH(CG)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.181/Rpr/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

Smt. Sushila Devi Agrawal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer-1, W/O Shri Brij Mohan Raigarh. Agrawal, Danipara, Raigarh PAN/GIR No.BBNPA 6570 Q (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri R.B.Doshi, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR

Date of Hearing : 11/01/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 15/01/ 2018

O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-

Bilaspur, dated 2.8.2013 for the assessment year 2007-08.

proceedings u/s.147 of the Act was not pressed by ld A.R. of the assessee,

therefore, same is dismissed as not pressed.

CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in assessing

the total income at Rs.51,55,930/- as against income shown at Rs.60,000/-.

2 ITA No.181/Rpr/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

that cash of Rs.66,33,386/- was deposited in assessee’s saving bank

account with Union Bank of India, Raigarh during the year under

consideration. Out of above, a sum of Rs.51,55,928/- was received as

arbitration award from Executive Engineer, PHE Department against supply

of materials of Rs.8,78,115/- in the financial year 1993-94 relevant to

assessment year 1994-95 and financial year 1994-95 relevant to

assessment year 1995-96. In the bills raised and accepted by the purchaser

department, it was stipulated that payments of bills were to be made within

15 days of supply of goods and bills raised and in case of non-payment,

interest @ 24% per annum had to be charged. Since the payments were

not received, a recovery suit was filed before the Hon’ble District Judge,

Raigarh including recovery of interest thereon. The total claim as per suit

was Rs.15,43,282/- i.e. Rs.8,78,115/- as principal amount, Rs.6,60,166/- as

interest on principal amount and Rs.5000/- as notice expenses. The civil

suit was decided in favour of the assessee on 28.2.2005 and decree of

Rs.15,43,282/- was awarded. Further, interest for the period from the date

of filing of suit to the date of payment and expenses of Rs.36,12,646/- was

also granted. Against the above decree, the PHE Department filed appeal

before the Hon’ble High Court on 18.5.2005 and prayed for stay of execution

of judgment. The Hon’ble High Court granted stay on 8.8.2005. The above

3 ITA No.181/Rpr/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

stay was vacated by Hon’ble High Court on 19.12.2005 with the direction to

the Government to deposit the amount within a period of four weeks

alongwith interest component @ 6% per annum upon the principal amount

from the date of filing of the suit i.e. 28.10.1996. Accordingly, cash of

Rs.51,55,928/-, i.e. Rs.15,43,282/-,on 23.3.2006 and Rs.36.12.646/- on

10.7.2006 was deposited by the Executive Engineer, PHE Department in the

District Civil Court. After filing solvent security guarantee before the District

Civil Court, the assessee withdrew Rs.15,43,282/- and Rs.26,12,646/- and

deposited the same in her bank account. The Assessing Officer observed

that the payments received by the assessee from the Executive Engineer,

PHE Department is in the nature of revenue and crystalised with the order of

the Court in the year under and the Assessing Officer has brought to tax the

entire amount of Rs.51,55,930/-.

authorities and materials available on record. The undisputed fact of the

case are that the assessee has received Rs.51,55,928/- as arbitration award

from Executive Engineer, PHE Department. The assessee in the income tax

return has offered income only in the year corresponding to the receipt

whereas the matter has travelled beyond the assessment year 2007-08 and

4 ITA No.181/Rpr/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

was crystalised by the order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 12.12.2014,

wherein, interest component of 6% has been settled. We are of the

considered opinion that the assessee is required to offer the income in the

assessment year 2015-16 as the income has been crystalised after the final

disposal of the case by the Hon’ble High Court. Therefore, we consider it fit

and proper to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to

compute the income of the assessee in the financial year 2015-16 in

accordance with the decision of Hon’ble High Court and to tax the income of

the assessee accordingly. We also direct the Assessing Officer to allow

proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

purposes.

Order pronounced on 15/01/2018. Sd/- sd/- (N.S Saini) (Pavan Kumar Gadale) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER Raipur; Dated 15 /01/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS

5 ITA No.181/Rpr/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08

Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Smt. Sushila Devi Agrawal, W/O Shri Brij Mohan Agrawal, Danipara, Raigarh 2. The Respondent. The Income Tax Officer-1, Raigarh 3. The CIT(A)- Bilaspur 4. Pr.CIT- Bilaspur 5. DR, ITAT, Raipur 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

BY ORDER,

SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Raipur