9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not acceptable. DR did not controvert the very relevant part that on maturity, the amount of FD was received and credited to the account of the Trust not to the assessee When the fixed deposits were of the Trust and treated as income of the Trust, the same amount made in the name of the assessee is directed to be deleted because this amounts to double taxation. - Decided in favour of assessee. Consequential addition being treated as interest income is also directed to be deleted. Addition being agricultural income - find no positive substance in the contention of the ld A.R., therefore, same is confirmed - ITA No. 113/CTK/2019 - - - Dated:- 19-5-2021 - Shrichandra Mohan Garg, Member (J) For the Appellant : P. K. Mishra, AR For the Respondents : S.C. Mohanty, DR ORDER Shrichandra Mohan Garg, Member (J) 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of the CIT(A),1, Bhubaneswar dated 20.8.2004 for the assessment year 1999-2000. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. For that, the impugned order of Reassessment so passed by the learned A.O. is without jurisdiction and without the authority of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals within 30 days. The assessee has received certified copy of the order on 14.4.2019 and preferred appeal before the ITAT on 22.4.2019. It is submitted that due to pendency of writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court, there was delay of 5207 days in filing appeal of appeal. The delay caused is unintentional. In view of above, the assessee has prayed that delay of 5207 days in filing the appeal may be condoned and appeal be admitted for hearing. 4. Ld DR did not oppose the condonation petition as the appeal is filed with the direction of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa. 5. After considering the rival submissions, we find that against the order of the ld CIT(A), the assessee had directly moved to Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in writ petition No. W.P.(C) No. 675 of 2005 and vide its order dated 20.3.2019, Hon'ble High Court has observed as under: 3. During course of hearing, ld counsel for the petitioner submits that due to subsequent development in the case, the petitioner may be permitted to file second appeal before the learned Tribunal against the orders under Annexure-8 and 12 and approach the ld 1st appellate authority against the order under An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposit of ₹ 28,00,000.00 as undisclosed income of the assessee which is not only wrong but also illegal and not sustainable, as the same is not backed by any evidence. Ld A.R. submitted that the Assessee as well as Shri S.K. Balbantray were the trustees of the Satyasai Educational Trust. At that time, the assessee was the Cabinet Minister in Odisha Government, as such, he could not get sufficient time to look into the Trust Matter and the alleged Trustee was looking after the running of Trust. It was also found that the alleged trustee started misutilising fund of Trust, and, therefore, he was discarded from the Trust. Ld A.R. submitted that thereafter he started giving this allegation. His removal from Trust was challenged by him in High Court and subsequently, in Supreme Court which was dismissed with a stricture against Shri S.K. Balbantray. 9. Ld A.R. submitted that while completing the Assessment of the Trust, the impugned disputed amount of fixed deposits to tune of ₹ 28,00,000.00 has already been included in the income of the Trust and has already been taxed in the hands of the Trust. Ld A.R. submitted that the Assessing Officer in the Assessment order has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts to double taxation, as such, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law, hence needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 13. Replying to above, ld DR submitted that the addition was made in the name of the Trust on protective basis but in the name of the assessee on substantive basis. He submitted that the case has to be decided on the facts of the assessment year 1999-2000 but not on the years when the amount of FD were transferred from saving bank the assessee in the name of the Trust. Ld D.R. further submitted that the bank account was not opened in the name of the Trust but resolution of the Trust was provided in the bank. The account was opened in the name of the wife of the assessee, who was a trustee. Ld D.R. submitted that saving account cannot be opened in the name of the Trust. He, therefore, submitted that the addition of ₹ 28,00,000/- deserves to be upheld. 14. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record of the case. There is no dispute to the fact that the amount of ₹ 28,00,000/- was the fixed deposit made in the assessment year 1999-2000. But similar addition in A.Y. 1999-2000 in assessment order dated 31.12.2007 was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to do in order to give substantial justice to the assessee and what the learned CIT(A) has exactly done in the present case. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order of the ld CIT(A), which we confirm and dismiss the appeals of the revenue and allow the cross objections filed by the assessee supporting the order of the learned CIT(A). 16. Therefore, the impugned addition of ₹ 28,00,000/- made by the A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is not sustainable, being double addition, has no legs to stand, as such, the same needs to be deleted. Further, the impugned fixed deposits were already assessed in the hand of the Trust much prior to the date of this Assessment, therefore, the contention of ld D.R. that the addition made in the hand of the Trust was on protective basis, hence he added it is added on substantive basis in the name of the assessee is not acceptable. The ld DR did not controvert the very relevant part that on maturity, the amount of FD was received and credited to the account of the Trust not to the assessee When the fixed deposits were of the Trust and treated as income of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
