Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Indore
M/S. Ssp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs The Acit-1(2), Indore on 24 May, 2017
अपीलीय अिधकरण, इदं ौर या
यपीठ, इदं ौर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE
BENCH, INDORE
ी सी.एम.गग , या
ियक सद य तथा ी ओ.पी.मीना
, लेखासद य के सम
BEFORE SHRI C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
M.A. No.23/Ind/2017 arising out
आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No.320/Ind/2014
&नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year:2006-07
SSP Enterprises P. Ltd., ACIT-1(2), Indore
Indore v.
अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent
था.ले.सं./PAN:AAJCS2648N
अपीलाथ क ओर से/Appellant by Shri Sudhir Padliya, CA
यथ क ओर से/Respondent by Shri Mohd. Javed, Sr. DR
सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of hearing 19.05.2017
उ घोषणा क तार ख/Date of pronouncement 24.05.2017
आदे श /O R D E R
PER O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER.
Through this Misc. Application, the assessee is seeking recall of the order of Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 320/Ind/2014 for assessment year 2006-07 dated 21.11.2016.
2. The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that while deciding the ground no. 1 of the assessee's appeal in I.T.A . No. SSP Enterprises/MANO.23/Ind/2017 arising out of ITA Nos.320 & 278/ Ind/2014/C.O. No. 29/Ind/2014/A.Y.:06-07 Page 2 of 5 320/Ind/2014, the Bench has observed as under in Para 12 of the Hon'ble Bench order dated 21.11.2016 :
"In view of our discussion in the foregoing paragraphs while dealing with the assessee's grounds of appeal is dismissed."
Therefore, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee's appeal in connection with addition of Rs. 28 lacs out of Rs. 40 lacs as confirmed by the CIT(A) in absence of bank statement of these parties has relied on the decisions of this Bench for ground no. 2 of the Revenue's appeal in I.T.A. No. 278/Ind/2014 dealt in the present order in Para 6 to 8 of the order and dismissing the ground no. 1 of the assessee's appeal accordingly. The AR therefore, submitted that the findings of the Tribunal results that no decision given by the Bench in connection with the addition related to Rs. 28 lacs as confirmed by the CIT(A) as such the decision regarding ground no. 1 the assessee's appeal remained to be discussed while deciding the appeal in I.T.A. No. 320/Ind/2014 filed by the assessee. Therefore, it was requested to recall the order to decide the matter in connection with addition of Rs. 28 lacs made u/s 68 of the Act and confirmed by CIT(A).
3. We have considered the facts, rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Tribunal while SSP Enterprises/MANO.23/Ind/2017 arising out of ITA Nos.320 & 278/ Ind/2014/C.O. No. 29/Ind/2014/A.Y.:06-07 Page 3 of 5 dealing with the ground relating to addition restricted to Rs. 28 lacs out of 40 lacs. by CIT(A) has given its finding in para 6 to 12 in the order dated 21.11.2016 in I.T.A. No. 278/Ind/2014 of Revenue's appeal as under:
6. The next ground is against the addition of Rs. 40 lacs which was restricted by the learned CIT(A) to Rs. 28 lacs. Against this deletion of addition of Rs. 12 lacs the department is in appeal and the assessee is in cross objection in support of deletion of addition of Rs. 12 lacs.
7. The short facts of the case are that the assessee has received the amount of share application money from 10 companies based at Calcutta being Rs. 4 lacs received from each company because these companies are at same place and only some are having addresses. The assessee filed copy of share application money and the copies of cheques issued.
The Assessing Officer observed that only three cheques were deposited from share applicants while the assessee has claimed that there were 10 applicants. Besides this, the cheque was deposited on the same day. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has to verify the genuineness of the transaction and the assessee was asked to submit the accounts of the share applicants to prove that there was no cash payment. In respect of three parties, M/s R.K. Skyline Construction Limited, M/s Renovision Commerce P. Ltd. and Amarjyoti Vyapar Limited, no cash deposit was found. In respect of seven parties, the Assessing Officer did not believe the explanation of the assessee. The matter travelled to the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs. 12 lacs by observing as under :-
"11. As a result while share application money ofRs.12 lakhs of three parties named above whose bank account were furnished by appellant are treated as genuine and such addition of Rs. 12 lakhs is deleted, the balance of share application money of Rs.28 lakhs from rest of 7 parties is treated as unexplained and addition of such amount is confirmed u/s 68 of Income Tax Act. As a result this ground no. 3 of appeal is partly allowed."SSP Enterprises/MANO.23/Ind/2017 arising out of ITA Nos.320 & 278/ Ind/2014/C.O. No. 29/Ind/2014/A.Y.:06-07 Page 4 of 5
8. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that in case of three parties the learned CIT(A) was of the view that three parties, viz. M/s R.K. Skyline Construction Ltd., M/s Renovision Commece P. Ltd and Amarjyoti Vyapar Ltd. no cash was deposited and the learned CIT(A) has verified the bank accounts of these parties and he has treated it as genuine and the addition of Rs. 12 lacs was deleted. Therefore, our interference is not called for.
9. In the cross objection, the assessee has simply supported the order of the learned CIT(A).
10. In view of our above discussion, the departmental appeal and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed.
11. In ITA No. 320/Ind/2014 the assessee has taken ground no. 1 that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in retaining the addition to Rs. 28 lacs out of the addition of Rs. 40,000/- u/s 68 of the Act.
12. In view of our discussion in the foregoing paragraph while dealing with the departmental appeal, this ground of the assessee is dismissed."
4. On going through the order of the Tribunal we find that the assessee's ground relating retaining the addition of Rs. 28 lacs out of addition of Rs. 40 lacs u/s 68 of the Act has been clearly dealt with reference to deciding the revenue's appeal on same ground whereby the revenue's appeal was dismissed and order of the CIT(A) was confirmed. Therefore, the Tribunal has given a clear cut finding and accordingly the ground relating to addition of Rs. 28 lacs of the assessee has been dealt with while deciding Revenue's appeal, and addition of Rs. 12 lacs was confirmed and revenue's appeal as well as assessee's appeal was dismissed. SSP Enterprises/MANO.23/Ind/2017 arising out of ITA Nos.320 & 278/ Ind/2014/C.O. No. 29/Ind/2014/A.Y.:06-07 Page 5 of 5 Therefore, in our considered opinion there is mistake apparent on record in the impugned order of Tribunal, accordingly the MA filed by the assessee is rejected and dismissed.
5. In the result, Misc. Application filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
6. The order pronounced in the open court on 24.05.2017 Sd/- Sd/-
(सी.एम.गग )/(C.M. GARG) (ओ.पी.मीना) /(O.P.MEENA) या यक सद य /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24th May, 2017 Sb*