Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji
Sheela Gupta, Alwar vs Ito, Alwar on 28 November, 2017
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM
M.A. No. 10/JP/2017
(Arising out of in ITA No. 518/JP/2014)
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, cuke The Income Tax Officer,
Prop. M/s Bhagwat Trading Co,. Vs. Ward 1(2),
26, New Anaj Mandir, Kherli, Alwar. Alwar.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. ACWPG 6343 C
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (Advocate)
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 27.10.2017.
?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 28/11/2017.
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM.
The Assessee has filed this Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order passed in ITA No. 518/JP/2014 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2008-09. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the miscellaneous application. The contents of the miscellaneous application are reproduced as under:-
"lsok es]a
Jheku~ lnL; egksn;]
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k]
t;iqj cSp
a ] t;iqjA
ekU;oj]
2
M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
fo'k;%& izkFkZuk i= /kkjk 254¼2½ I.T. Act 1961 ds rgr& lq/kkjus fjdkMZ
dh Li'V xyfr;ksa dks & M.A. No.10/JP/2016 (A/o of I.T.A. No.518/2014) dj fu/kkZj.k o'kZ 2008&09 Appellant Respondent Jhefr 'khyk xqIrk Jheku vk;dj vf/kdkjh egksn; izk-s Hkxor Vªfs Max dEiuh cuke okMZ 1¼2½ vyoj 26] vukt e.Mh] [ksjyh fuosnu gS fd mijksDr M.A. No.10/JP/2016 esa fuEu fyf[kr fjdkMZ dh Li'V xyfr;kWa gs ftUgsa /kkjk 254(2) esa lq/kkjus dh d`ik djsAa M.A. No.10/JP/2016 dh ikfjr vkns'k dh Nk;kizfr layXu gSA ¼Ex-1½ Jheku Mh-vkj- egksn; ds dgus ls Jheku lnL; egksn; us esjh vihy ua- 518/JP/2014 dks vLohdkj dj fn;k vkSj esjs f[kykQ vihy fu.kZ; esa bruk cMk ykaNu yxk fn;k fd odhy lkgc tkucw>dj vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ ds le{k is'k ugha gq, vkSj vc vkids le{k Hkh tkucw>dj ¼I.T.A.T.½ ds le{k gkftj ugha gq, gSA Jheku lnL; egksn; us vius fu.kZ; esa ;g fy[kdj vihy [kkfjt dj nh dh & "Thus the assesses had tried to interfere in the process of justice by incorporating something which was not on record, assessee has tried to mislead the facts on record, consequently the appeal of the assessee is dismissed."
vxj Jheku lnL; egksn; bl rF; dh iqf'V Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ vyoj ls dj ysrs rks fLFkfr Li'V gks tkrh dh /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= esa ;g igys ls gh fy[kk gqvk Fkk fd& ^^vxj vki lger ugha gS rks eq>s lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k tkos^^ bl rF; dh iqf'V ds fy, eSusa lcwr esa Jheku lnL; egksn; ds ikl /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= dh lR; izfr tks Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ vyoj ds dk;kZy; ls yh xbZ Fkh] mldh ewy izfr is'k dj nh xbZ FkhA vkidh lsok esa mldh Nk;kizfr iqu% is'k dh tk jgh gSA ¼Ex-2½ 3 M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
vkidh lsok esa I.T.A.T. ds vihy fu.kZ; ua-518/JP/2014 o izkFkZuk i= /kkjk 254 ¼2½ dh Hkh Nk;kizfr iqu% is'k dh tk jgh gSA ¼Ex-3 & Ex-4½ Jheku lnL; egksn; us Jheku Mh-vkj- egksn; ds dgus ls nwljk ykaNu ;g yxk;k gS fd odhy lkgc Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ vyoj ds le{k tkucw.dj is'k ugha gq,A Jheku th bl lUnHkZ esa esjk fuosnu gS fd tc eq>s uksfVl nsdj cqyk;k gh ugha x;k rks eSa muds le{k dSls gkftj gksrkA ;g /kkjk 154 dk vkns'k mUgksusa fcuk is'kh dk uksfVl tkjh fd;s ikfjr fd;k gSA bl rF; dh iqf'V vki i=koyh eaxkdj dj ldrs gSA Jheku lnL; egksn; us Jheku Mh-vkj- egksn; ds dgus ls rhljk ykaNu ;g yxk;k gS fd odhy lkgc tkucw> dj vkids le{k Hkh is'kh ij gkftj ugha gq;s gSA bl iz'u dk tckc Hkh eSa vius i= fnukad 26@02@2016 dks ns pqdk gwWAa bl i= dh Nk;k izfr layXu gSA ¼Ex-5½ bl i= dks eSa eq[; va'k Re-Produce dj jgk gwWAa ^^eSa vkils ;g fuosnu djuk pkgrk gwWa fd eSa fiNys 26 lky ls Heart Patient gwWa blfy, eq>s MkDVjksa us lQj ds fy, euk dj j[kk gSA eSa fiNys 26 lky ls ekuuh; vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k t;iqj ds le{k written submission ds vk/kkj ij gh vihyksa esa fu.kZ; ikfjr djkrk vk jgk gwWAa is'kh ij gkftj u gksus ds fy, eq>s {kek djsx a s^^ Jheku lnL; egksn; us Jheku Mh-vkj- egksn; ds dgus ls pkSFkk ykaNu ;g yxk;k gS fd& "The paper Filed with submission before I.T.A.T. that they do not certify that they are certified copies."
bl lUnHkZ esa fuosnu gS fd Jheku lgk;d iathdkj egksn; I.T.Act 1961 dh /kkjk 285 ds v/khu dh xbZ vihy esa vihykFkhZ dh =qfV;ksa dh lalwpuk gsrq vk-d-v- la[;k 518/JP/2014 tkjh fd;k x;k FkkA bldh ikyuk esa rqjur 13@08@2014 dks tckc ns fn;k FkkA vkidh lsok esa ml tcko dh Nk;kizfr is'k gSA ¼Ex&6½ vxj Jheku iathdkj egksn; us i=koyh ij dkxt ugha yxk;s gS rks esjh blesa xyrh ugha gSA Jheku lnL; egksn; us M.A. No.10/JP/2016 esa tks fu.kZ; fn;k gS og fo'k; (Subject Matter) ls gVdj fn;k gSA eSus esjh M.A. esa tks xyfr;kWa crkbZ Fkh mu ij fu.kZ; esa ,d 'kCn Hkh ugha fy[kk gSA esjh bl M.A. dks vLohdkj dj Jheku lnL; egksn; us U;k; ugha fd;k gSA vxj esfjV ij esjh M.A. dks Jheku lnL; egksn;
4M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
Lohdkj dj esjh vihy dks esfjV ij vLohdkj dj nsrs rks eq>s fcYdqy nq%[k ugha gksrkA vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj rF;ksa ¼Facts½ ds vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; nsus okyh vfUre U;k;ky; gSA bl U;k;ky; }kjk rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; djus okys izdj.k esa mPp U;k;ky; o mPpre U;k;ky; rd lquokbZ ¼vihy½ ugha gSA Jheku lnL; egksn; us vius vkns'k M.A. No.10/JP/2016 esa fdrus rF; xyr fy[ks gS fd %& "None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of service of notice of this hearing.
Consequently we are left with no alternative but to decide miscellaneous application on merits Ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing ld D.R. & after perusal of the material available on record".
eu dks cMh ihMk gksrh gS tc Jheku lnL; egksn; vius fu.kZ; esa ;g fy[krs gS fd uksfVl dh rkfey gksus ds ckotwn dksbZ gkftj ugha gS vksj nwljh rjQ bl vkns'k esa fy[krs gS fd& "The Bench after considering the record, written submission of the assessee & arguments of the ld D.R."
Jheku th tc eSus fnukad 25-02-2016 dks written submission Hkst fn;s vkSj is'kh ij gkftj u gksus ds dkj.k crk fn;k rks Jheku lnL; egksn; dks fu.kZ; esa ;g fy[kus dh D;k vko';drk Fkh fd eq>s Exparte order ikfjr djus ds vykok vkSj dksbZ fodYi ugha FkkA vUr esa vkils fuosnu gS fd M.A. No.10/JP/2016 esa ftlesa fnukad 21@04@2016 dks fu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k gS mlesa fjdkMZ dh Li'V xyrh gS ftls /kkjk 254¼2½ esa iqu% lq/kkjus dh d`ik djsAa "
2. Per contra Ld. D/R opposed the submissions and submitted that the present application is cross misuse of process. He contended that the present application deserves to be dismissed as exemplary cost.5
M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
3. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record. From the contents of the application, it is evident that the grievances of the assessee is non-consideration of written submissions by the Tribunal and the Ld. CIT(A). The written submissions of the Ld. Counsel dated 25/02/2016 by Shree Chand Gupta, Shri Ghan Shayam Gupta & Shri Suresh Chand Gupta which signed by Shree Chand Gupta as under:-
"dsl ds rF; o fuosnu mijksDr dsl eSa eSusa fnukad 10-12-2013 dks Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ vyoj ds vihy vkns'k esa xyfr;ksa dks lq/kkjus ds fy;s /kkjk 154 esa izkFkZuk i= is'k fd;k FkkA ftldh Nk;k izfr vkids le{k is'k gSA ¼EX-1½ bl izkFkZuk i= esa Li'V :i ls fuosnu dj fn;k x;k Fkk fd vxj esjs }kjk fn;s x;s /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= esa of.kZr xyrfr;ksa dks lq/kkjus es lger ugha gS rks eq>s lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k tkos] ysfdu Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ us esjs }kjk fuosnu ij dksbZ /;ku ugha fn;k vkSj Expert Order ikfjr dj i= dks vLohdkj dj fn;kA dkuwu esa ;g Li'V izko/kku gS fd O;olk;h ds f[kykQ vkns'k ikfjr djus ls iwoZ mls lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k tkuk pkfg;sA vihy vkns'k esa eSusa tks /kkjk 154 esa fjdkMZ dh Li'V xyfr;ksa dks lq/kkjus ds fy;s tks dkj.k fy[ks gs mUgsa Re-produce dj jgk gwWAa ^^eSa mijksDr vihy vkns'k esa bl ckr ls lger gwWa fd vxj ewy fooj.k ¼Original Return½ nsjh ls is'k dh xbZ gS rks la'kksf/kr fooj.kh ¼Revised Return½ Lohdkj ;ksX; ugha gSA ysfdu bl vihy esa ,d fcUnq vkSj Hkh gS ftlds ckjs esa vkius vihy vkns'k esa ,d Hkh 'kCn ugh fy[kk gS vkidks ml fcUnq ij vkns'k ikfjr djuk gSA^^ O;olk;h us Revised Return esa Short Capital Gain ls :-1]66]337@& dh vk; n'kkZ;h gS vkSj F&O esa :- 4]22]356@& dk uqdlku n'kkZ;k gSA Jheku vk;dj vf/kdkjh egksn; us vius dj fu/kkZj.k vkns'k esa Revised Return dks ysV ekudj Short Capital Gain dh vk; ij rks dj vkjksfir dj fn;k ysfdu F&O dss Loss dks Ignore dj fn;kA dkuwu esa Li'V :i ls fy[kk gS fd nksuks O;olk;ksa ds uQk o uqdlku dks vkil esa Set off djuk iMsxk vxj Set off esa uqdlku jgrk gS rks mls Carry forward ys tkus dh btktr ugha gS D;ksfa d ewy fooj.kh ysV is'k dh xbZ blfy;s la'kksf/kr fooj.kh ekU; ugha gSA Jheku CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; us vkns'k esa /kkjk 6 M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
139¼1½]139¼2½]139¼3½]139¼4½]139¼5½]72¼1½]73¼2½ o 74¼3½ ds ckjs esa rks foLrkj esa fMLdl fd;k gS ysfdu /kkjk 70 o 70¼1½ ds ckjs esa ,d 'kCn Hkh ugha fy[kk gSA /kkjk 139 ds fooj.kh is'k djus ls lEcU/k gS o /kkjk 72]73 o 74 dk uqdlku Carry Forward djus ls lEcU/k gSA /kkjk 70 o 70¼1½ dsoy O;olk;ks ds uQk&uqdlku dks vkil esa Set Off djus ds lEcU/k eSa gS] ftlds ckjs essa Jheku CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; us ,d 'kCn Hkh ugha fy[kk gSA Jheku vk;dj vf/kdkjh egksn; us nksuks O;olk;ksa ds uQk&uqdlku dks vkil esa Set Off ugha fd;k gS vkSj ekuuh; CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; us Hkh bl fcUnq ij dksbZ fu.kZ; ugha fn;k gS dsoy blh fcUnq ij fu.kZ; nsuk gSA mnkgj.k ds fy;s vxj ,d O;olk;h ds 10 dkjksckj gS vkSj mlus ikWpa dkjksckj esa ,d djksM+ dk uQk n'kkZ;k gS vkSj ikWp a dkjksckj esa 50 yk[k dk uqdlku] vxj mlus ewy fooj.kh nsjh ls is'k dh gs rks dkuwu ;g ugha dgrk gS fd ikWp a O;olk;ksa ds uQk ,d djksM ij rks dj yxk fn;k tkos o ikWpa O;olk;ks ds uqdlku :-50 yk[k dks Ignore dj fn;k tkosA eSa vkidh lsok esa Section 70 of IT Act 1961 dks Reproduce dj jgk gwWa ftlesa Li'V :i ls fy[kk gS fd & "Set off of loss from one source against income from another source under the same head"
"70(1) save as otherwise provided in this Act, where the net for any assessment year in respect of any source falling under any head of income other then capital gain is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against his income from any other source under the same head."
Ekkuuh; CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; us bl /kkjk esa vihy fu.kZ; esa ,d 'kCn Hkh ugh fy[kk gSA bl fcUnq ij esjs }kjk fyf[kr esa Hkh fuosnu dj fn;k x;k FkkA d`i;k vki vihy fu.kZ; ds ist ua-4 dk iSjk ua-2 ns[kus dh d`ik djsAa /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= esa Jheku CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; ls Li'V :i ls fuosnu dj fn;k Fkk fd ;g fjdkMZ dh Li'V xyrh gS tks /kkjk 154 esa lq/kkjus ;ksX; gSA vxj vki lger ugha gS rks eq>s lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k tkosA mijksDr dkj.kksa dks i<+us ds ckn Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ us vkus vkns'k esa tks fy[kk gS mls Reproduce fd;k tk jgk gSA "I have gone through the application filed by the appellant & do not find any merits in the same as the issue as the issues stated in the application have already been covered in Para 4.03 to 4.6 of the order dated 11.10.2013"
7M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
eSa vkidh lsok esa Jheku vk;dj vk;qDr egksn; ¼vihy½ us tks vihy fu.kZ; esa Para No.4-3 to 4-6 esa /kkjk 70 o 70 ¼1½ ds ckjs esa ,d Hkh 'kCn ugha fy[kk gS mls Reproduce dj jgk gwW]a vki ns[ksxsa dh para No.4-3 to 4-6 esa /kkjk 70 o 70 ¼1½ ds ckjs esa ,d Hkh 'kCn ugha fy[kk gS iwjs vihy vkns'k esa dsoy Revised Return ds ckjs esa gh foLrkj ls Discuss fd;k gSA 4.3 I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant and also the order of the AO and find that during the course of assessment proceedings the appellant had filed a revised return of income which has not been accepted by the AO for the reasons stated above. The undisputed facts in brief are as under :-
(i) Return income of Rs. 1,64,200/- filed on 18.08.2008 for A.Y. 2008-09.
(ii) Notice u/s 143 (2) issued on 25.03.2009.
(iii) Revised return filed on 02.12.2010 declaring income NIL, after claiming a share Loss on account of speculative transactions (F&O) amounting to Rs. 4,22,356.
4.4 In this case, the due date of filing of return of income was 31.07.02008 and the Return was filed belated on 18-08-2008. As regards, the filing of a revised return is concerned, the provision of sub section (5) of section 139 of the IT Act provide that "if any person, having furnished a return under sub section (1), of section 142 discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or time before the expiry of any year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier," Thus, it is clear from this , that a valid revised return could be filed only up to 31.03.2010. In this case the appellant has filed a revised return only on 02.12.2010, which is beyond the time permissible under the law and is hence invalid return.
8M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
4.5 The appellant has agitated that the loss claimed in the revised return may be allowed. It would be relevant to consider the provisions of sub section (3) of the It act in this regard, which are as "if any person who has sustained a loss in any previous year under the head " profit and gains of business or profession" or under the head " capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub- section 72, or sub- section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1), a return of loss in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and con- staining such other particulars as may be prescribed, and all the provisions of this Act shall apply as if it were a return under sub- section (1), "Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court is the case of Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha Vs. CIT- 220 ITR 67 has held that the right to file a revise return u/s 139(1) or 139(2) of the IT Act. This decision has also been followed recently by the Bombay High Count in the case of Menses Fernandes Enterprises Vs. ITO 356 ITR 0082 by holding that no revise return can be filed by a person where there has been a delay in filing of return of income.
4.6 Thus, it may be seen from the above discussion that the claim of the appellant is untenable in view of the clear provision of law, in view of this I uphold the action of the AO in disallowing the claim of loss made by the appellant and has rightly brought to tax the short term capital gain of Rs. 1,66,237/- declared in the information filed with the revised return. The appeal of the assessee on this ground is dismissed.
pwWfa d Jheku CIT ¼vihy½ egksn; us Para No.4-3 to 4-6 esa /kkjk 70 o 70 ¼1½ esa Set Off of loss from one source against income from another source under the same head ds ckjs esa ,d Hkh 'kCn ugha fy[kk gS vkSj u gh O;olk;h dks /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= dks vLohdkj djus ls iwoZ lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k gSA 9 M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
mijksDr rF;ksa o dkuwuh fcUnqvksa dks e}s utj j[krs gq;s vkils fuosnu gS fd /kkjk 154 ds izkFkZuk i= dks Lohdkj djus ds vkns'k ikfjr djus dh d`ik djsAa "
We find that similar miscellaneous application was filed bearing MA No. 10/JP/2016 which was disposed of vide order dated 21/04/2016 by observing as under:-
"The Bench after considering the records, written submissions of the assessee and arguments of the Ld. AR observed that the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee does not require any more consideration and adjudication. The Bench has also taken into consideration its order and observed that if foes not require any review/ rectification. In this view of the matter, we do not find any substance in the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee which is dismissed."
Yet again the assessee has made an application seeking rectification of the order.
Since the Tribunal has already considered the written submissions, reconsidering the same again would tantamount to review of the order which is not within the scope of section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the miscellaneous application deserves to be dismissed.
4. In the result, Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is dismissed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on Tuesday, the 28th day of November 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
( HkkxpUn ½ ( dqy Hkkjr)
( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT )
ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member
Jaipur
Dated:- 28/11/2017.
Pooja/
vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs "kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. The Appellant- Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
2. The Respondent - The ITO, Ward- 1(2), Alwar.
3. The CIT(A).10
M.A. No. 10/JP/2017.
Smt. Sheela Gupta, Alwar.
4. The CIT,
5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. Guard File (M.A No. 10/JP/2017) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar