Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
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.
Ground No.2 of appeal in respect of initiation of reassessment
proceedings u/s.147 of the Act was not pressed by ld A.R. of the assessee,
therefore, same is dismissed as not pressed.
The sole issue involved for adjudication in this appeal is that the
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
The facts are that, on an AIR information, the Assessing Officer found
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/-.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower
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.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
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