2018 (7) TMI 1086 - AT - Income Tax

Enhancement of income - addition on account of bank interest and other income - Held that - AO disobeyed the order of the Tribunal dated 13th October, 2016 by repeating the addition of ₹ 18,18,599/- on account of bank interest and others which addition has already been deleted by the Tribunal vide order dated 13th October, 2016. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) have exceeded their jurisdiction in making addition and enhancing the same addition on account of bank interest etc. The orders of the authorities below are illegal, void ab initio. The AO and the CIT(A) have without any justification fail to follow the order of the Tribunal and as such liable for proceedings under contempt of court s Act. Set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the entire addition made by the AO and enhanced by the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition of bank interest income and interest on income taxed refund.
2. Disobedience of ITAT order by AO.
3. Enhancement of income by Ld. CIT(A).

Analysis:
1. The case involved an appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2010-11, where the main addition of ?18,18,600/- was made by the AO concerning bank interest income and interest on income taxed refund. The assessee contended that the issue had been decided in their favor by ITAT in a previous case for assessment year 2004-05. The AO, however, re-fixed the matter for fresh hearing based on the Tribunal's order, and repeated the addition due to a Supreme Court judgment. The Ld. CIT(A) enhanced the income further, leading to the current appeal challenging the additions.

2. The assessee argued before ITAT that the Tribunal had previously deleted the addition in a similar case for the assessment year 2010-11. The Tribunal found that the AO and Ld. CIT(A) had misunderstood the previous order, exceeding their jurisdiction by making and enhancing the addition. The Tribunal cited legal precedents to emphasize that when a matter is remanded to the assessing officer, their jurisdiction is limited to the specific issue. As the AO failed to confine the assessment to the remanded issue of expenses, and instead repeated the deleted addition, the Tribunal held the actions of the authorities as illegal and void ab initio. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders and deleted the entire addition made by the AO and enhanced by Ld. CIT(A).

3. The Tribunal concluded that the AO and Ld. CIT(A) had not followed the order of the Tribunal dated 13th October, 2016, and had exceeded their jurisdiction in making and enhancing the addition of bank interest income and other income. The Tribunal held the orders of the authorities below as illegal and void ab initio, and stated that the AO and Ld. CIT(A) were liable for contempt of court proceedings. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the orders and deleting the entire addition made by the AO and enhanced by Ld. CIT(A.