9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied and examined at the end of AO - the orders of the authorities had been passed on the back of the assessee and by ignoring vital objections and contentions of the assessee – the assessment order and appellate order are not sustainable and are set aside – thus, the matter is remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication - the AO is also directed that income tax can be charged only on the person who earned income from the liquor business – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 4533/Del/2011, C. O. No. 394/Del/2011 - - - Dated:- 30-4-2014 - Shri G. D. Agrawal And Shri Chandra Mohan Garg,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri S. K. Monga, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Sameer Sharma, Sr. DR ORDER Per Chandramohan Garg, J. M. The appeal of the assessee as well as C.O. of the Revenue have been filed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-I, Dehradun dated 10.06.2011 passed in Appeal No. 14/RKE/2008-09 for AY 2006-07. 2. Grounds of appeal in ITA No. 4533/Del/2011 read as under:- 1. That Smt. Vimla Devi denies to tax and for any liability which has been created in her name interalia. (i) That she is permanent servicing in ANGANWADI Distt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see submitted that there were unavoidable circumstances, hence this second paper book is being filed for the first time before this Bench. 4. Ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessee s permanent address is Village Nanhera Teeptan, Block Nangal, Tehsil Deoband, Distt. Saharanpur where the assessee has been living for the last 40 years. The counsel submitted that the assessee is serving in Bal Vikas Pariyojna, Nangal, Saharanpur as Anganwadi worker since 25.4.1979 and as per salary certificate dated 02.09.2011, she is drawing salary of Rs.1763/- per month. Ld. counsel further submitted that the assessee has no other source of income and assessee has two sons namely Shri Rajbir Singh and Shri Vikas and the assesee is not on talking terms with Rajbir Singh (elder son) for the last more than 8 years. The counsel further submitted that Shri Rajbir Singh with his partner Shri Ravinder Singh applied for taking the licence for liquor business with the forged signatures of the assessee and they have carried on the business of liquor during FY 2005-06 relevant to the AY 2006-07 and maintained the books of accounts, got them audited as per provisions of section 44AB of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concluded that she has nothing to say in the matter and appeal is being decided on merits. The counsel vehemently contended that against the date of hearing fixed for 14.03.2011, the assessee filed an adjournment application on 12.03.2011 under speed post enclosed with an affidavit, Vakalatnama of Shri Tilak Raj, Advocate, Roorkee. This adjournment application has not been considered and the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) passed the impugned order dated 10.06.11 i.e. about three months later from the date of hearing. The counsel also submitted that the assessee filed an application u/s 154 of the Act but the same was not decided properly. Subsequently, the assessee was bound to file this appeal. 7. Ld. counsel of the assessee has drawn our attention towards second Paper Book dated 28.8.2012 spread over 110 pages and submitted that when the assessee received notice dated 03.03.2011 from Commissioner of Income Tax, then the assessee became active to protest proceedings of the tax authorities on the sole basis that the assessee was never engaged in liquor business and all proceedings from obtaining of license to filing of income tax return and filing of appeal before the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese documents have not been signed by the assessee. The counsel further submitted that if the assessee is living permanently since last 40 years in Village Nanhera Teeptan, drawing a meager salary of Rs.1763/-, then if other family members of the assessee with the aid of outside persons and associates contract liquor business in the name of assessee by making forged signatures, then the assessee cannot be held responsible to pay tax from the income earned by other persons from liquor business. 9. Replying to the above, ld. DR submitted that the second Paper Book dated 28.8.2012 spread over 110 pages was not submitted before the authorities below and, therefore, these documents require examination and verification at the end of the Assessing Officer. Ld. DR further submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) had decided objections of the Assessing Officer in para 3 4 of the impugned order and when the family members of the assessee are conducting business of liquor in the name of assessee and her son and husband operating bank account and other activities in the assessee s name, then the assessee cannot escape from her liability to pay tax on the income earned from the li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tantiate the assessee's contention that she was a benamidar for her son Shri Rajendra Singh. On his part, Shri Rajveer Singh has not come forward to own up the business and has shown no interest in the assessment or the appeal proceeding. It is the assessee in whose name the license for liquor-vending was issued. It is she who furnished the return of income as well as preferred appeal against the assessment. According to the Chartered Accountant, the audit report and the audited accounts bear her signature. Unless she substantiates her contention by reliable evidence or her son voluntary owns up the business as well as tax liability, she cannot get away by saying that she was a benamidar of her son. Accordingly, it is held that she alone is accountable for the business done in her name. 11. We also observe that the impugned order has been passed on 10.06.2011. Before that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) asked a detailed report from ITO, Ward-2, Roorkee through letter dated 29.12.09 (PB page No. 54-55) and the ITO submitted his report dated 12.02.2010 to Commissioner of Income Tax(A). The last part of this report (i) reads as under:- i) Smt. Vimla Devi, the assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1979 and my designation is ANGANWADI. 2. That I had blessed with two sons namely Sh Rajbir Singh and Sh. Vikas and two daughters. My elder son Sh. Rajbir Singh has been carrying on the business of Country Liquor and during the A. y. 2006-07 he had taken the Country Liquor License in my name duly forged signatures on the application and other documents for which 1 had no knowledge. 3. That he had filed the Income tax Return in my name of the business of Country Liquor for the period 01.04.2005 to 31 .03.2006 and I had neither signed any Income tax, Return nor filed with the I.T.O, Ward-2, Roorkee. 4. That my son engaged the Income Tax Lawyer Sh. Ankur Goyal Advocate and made the forged signatures on his Vakalatnama. 5. That the Income Tax Case had completed u/s 144 of the LT .Act. 1961 on 30.12.2008 on a total income of Rs. 39,03,450/- against which the Appeal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax(A) had filed by my son and his Counsel and made the forged signatures in the Memorandum of his Form.. 6. That alongwith my husband Sh. R.P. Singh had appeared before the Hon'ble CIT(A)-1 on 18.12.2009 and told to the Appellate Authority that I had not carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpert and as per his report dated 29.4.13, the signatures on liquor licence application, licence, income tax return, vakalatnama, audit report, appeal form No. 35 were found forged and as per this report, signature on all above documents were not signed by the assessee as the disputed signatures and standard signatures were not made by the same person and in view of this report, the contentions of the assessee are found to be substantial and these contentions were not decided by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) in proper manner and the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) proceeded to decide the appeal on merits by ignoring the submissions and contentions of the assessee. 14. As we have already observed that the documents submitted by the assessee first time before this Tribunal contained in paper book 2 dated 28.4.2012 were not before the authorities below during assessment and appellate proceedings, therefore, we also find it just and proper that these documents should be verified and examined at the end of Assessing Officer in the light of contentions and submissions of the assessee and other surrounding circumstances. 15. Accordingly, we are inclined to hold that the orders of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
