N.S.L.R.Prasad Raju, (Erstwhile ... vs Department Of Income Tax

ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad 'B' Bench, Hyderabad

Before Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member & Smt.Asha Vijayaraghavan, Judicial Member

ITA No. Appellant Respondent A.Y 1877/Hyd/2014 ACIT Central N.S.L.R. Prasad Raju 2004-05 Circle 3(2) (Erstwhile Director of Hyderabad Liquidated Co. M/s. Pallavi Real Estate & Developers P Ltd) Hyderabad PAN: AADCP 1994 J 1878/Hyd/2014 ACIT Central D.Srinivasa Raju, 2004-05 Circle 3(2) (Erstwhile Director of Hyderabad Liquidated Co. M/s. Ugandhar Estates P Ltd) Hyderabad PAN: AGVPD 3460 D 1879/Hyd/2014 ACIT Central D.Srinivasa Raju, 2004-05 Circle 3(2) (Erstwhile Director of Hyderabad Liquidated Co. M/s. Girivardhan Estates (P) Ltd Hyderabad PAN: AACCG 8035 C 1880/Hyd/2014 ACIT Central N. Rama Raju, 2004-05 Circle 3(2) (Erstwhile Director of Hyderabad Liquidated Co. M/s. Yeshwant Property Developers Pvt Ltd Hyderabad PAN: AAACY 2118 A 1881/Hyd/2014 ACIT Central N. Rama Raju, 2004-05 Circle 3(2) (Erstwhile Director of Hyderabad Liquidated Co. M/s. Jyotsna Property P Ltd Hyderabad PAN: AABCJ 3728 N

For Revenue: Shri Rajat Mitra, DR For Assessee: Shri K.C. Devdas

Date of Hearing : 29.07.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 29.07.2015

Page 1 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

ORDER

Per Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan, J.M.

These are the appeals preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) VII, Hyderabad dated 30.09.2014 for A.Y 2004-05:

ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014 1. The assessee is an individual and the erstwhile Director of a liquidated company M/s Pallavi Real Estates & Developers Pvt.

Ltd. The assessment which was appealed against before the CIT (A) was M/s. Pallavi Real Estates & Developers Pvt. Ltd for A.Y 2004-05, against the order of the AO who completed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act dated 30.12.2011. The AO made an addition u/s 68 for Rs.4,16,33,166.

2. The AR of the assessee appeared before the AO and submitted that the income returned was Rs.1,74,567 by return filed on 8.11.2004 and the company was liquidated on 25.3.2008. It was submitted that notice u/s 148 was issued on the company dated 14.03.2011. Further notice u/s 148 was served on M/s SRSR Advisory Pvt. Ltd (another company). It was further stated that in response to the notice issued u/s 148 to the company, the erstwhile Director of the company Shri N.S.L.R. Prasad Raju replied that the company was liquidated on 25.03.2008. Assessment proceedings continued by way of issue of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.08.2011.

Page 2 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

3. Shri N.S.L.R. Prasad Raju again replied to the AO that the company is no longer in existence and its name was also struck off by the Registrar of Companies as per section 560 of the Companies Act. He objected to the action of the AO to assess the liquidated company. AO, however, overruled the objection stating that since the company was existent during financial year 2003- 04, assessment can be made and the AO completed the assessment. AO examined the balance sheet and noted that the following were shown as sources of funds:

Sources of funds/liabilities Amount credited in the books (Rs.) Share capital 1,00,000 Share Application Money 24,00,000 Outstanding liabilities 3,91,33,166 Total 4,16,33,166

4. AO held that no information or confirmation in respect of funds were filed and treated the entire amount of Rs.4.16 crores as unexplained credit u/s 68 and raised a tax demand of Rs.2.88 crores on the company M/s Pallavi Real Estates & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT (A).

5. The AR stated before the CIT (A) that assessment on the company which is liquidated and struck off by the Registrar of Companies is invalid. He also filed the judicial decisions in support of his contentions. The CIT (A) while giving his findings held as follows:

"6.1 Chapter XV of the Income Tax Act speaks of liability in special cases. Section 178 speaks of company in

Page 3 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

liquidation and section 179 speaks of liability of Director of Pvt. Co. in liquidation. The provisions thus have been made in the Act for taking action against a company who is undergoing the process of liquidation and is yet to be liquidated or where there are any tax dues/liability of a liquidated private company, which cannot be recovered. These provisions were made so that what is due to the State is recovered. By no stretch of imagination these provisions can be extended to make an assessment on a company liquidated four years ago and that too by invoking the provisions of section 148 and that too serving the notice on an altogether different company, a separate legal entity and issuing notice u/s 142(1) of the erstwhile Director who repeatedly drew attention of the AO to the liquidated status of the company. After all this, the AO had simply added whatsoever was shown in balance sheet as sources of funds and that too for the reason that no information was being filed by the assessee".

6. Aggrieved, Department is in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds:

"1. The ld CIT (A)-VII Hyderabad has erred in both facts and in law.

2. The ld CIT (A) VII Hyderabad erred in holding that jurisdiction over the assessee was not vesting with AO.

3. The ld CIT (A)VII Hyderabad erred in holding that no order could be passed on the liquidated companies.

4. The ld CIT (A) VII Hyderabad erred in holding that the notice was not served on the assessee.

7. We heard both parties. We find that the AO has invoked the provisions of section 147 and served the notice on a company which is altogether a different company and has also issued notice u/s 142(1) to the erstwhile Director who has already submitted that the company which has been assessed has been

Page 4 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

liquidated on 25.03.2008. We are of the opinion that the issuance of notice u/s 148 on a (different company) i.e. another legal entity namely M/s. SRSR Advisory (P) Ltd makes the proceedings void ab initio as notice has been issued to the wrong entity. Hence we confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the Revenue's appeal.

8. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

ITA No.1878/Hyd/2014 1. The assessment which was being appealed against before the CIT (A) is on the company M/s Ugandhar Estates Pvt. Ltd for A.Y 2004-05. AO completed assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act. On 30.12.2011. The only addition made was u/s 68 was Rs.4,26,50,380.

2. The facts of the case are that original return of income of the company for the year under consideration was filed on 8.11.2004, returning an income of Rs.1,04,918. The company was liquidated on 15.03.2008 and notice u/s 148 was issued on the company on 14.03.2011. In response to the notice issued to the Company, the erstwhile Director of the Company Shri D. Srinivasa Raju replied that the company was liquidated on 15.03.2008. However, assessment proceedings continued by way of issue of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.08.2011. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT (A).

3. The facts are identical to that as in the case of N.S.L.R. Prasada Raju in ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014. The CIT (A) had repeated his finding which is as follows:

Page 5 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

"By no stretch of imagination, these provisions can be extended to make an assessment on a company liquidated four years ago and that too by invoking the provisions of section 148 and that too serving the notice on an altogether different company (a separate legal entity) and issuing notice u/s 142(1) to the erstwhile Director who repeatedly drew attention of the AO to the liquidated status of the company".

4. Since we have already decided similar issue in ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014, the same conclusions shall be adopted in this case also.

5. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

ITA No.1879/Hyd/2014: 1. The assessment which was being appealed before the CIT (A) is on the company, M/s Girivardhan Estates Pvt. Ltd for A.Y 2004-05 against order of AO. The AO had completed assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act on 30.12.2011. The demand raised was Rs.2,88,30,095. The only addition made u/s 68 was Rs.4,16,35,355.

2. The fact in this case is that original return of income for A.Y was filed on 8.11.2004 returning an income of Rs.1,46,880. The company was liquidated on 27.03.2008 and notice u/s 148 was issued on the company on 14.03.2011. Notice u/s 148 was served on M/s SRSR Advisory Pvt Ltd. In response to the notice issued u/s 148 to the company, the erstwhile Director of the company Sri D. Srinivasa Raju replied that the company was liquidated on 27.03.2008. Assessment proceedings continued by way of issue of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.08.2011.

Page 6 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

3. We find that the CIT (A) findings are similar to that of in ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014. Hence we are of the opinion that the issuance of notice u/s 148 on a different company namely M/s. SRSR Advisory (P) Ltd makes the proceedings void ab initio as notice has been issued to the wrong entity. Hence we confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the Revenue's appeal.

4. In the Result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

ITA No.1880/Hyd/2014 1. The assessment which was actually appealed against before the CIT (A) was on the company M/s Yeshwant Property Developers Pvt. Ltd for A.Y 2004-05, AO completed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act on 30.12.2011. The demand raised was Rs.2,88,30,896. The only addition made u/s 68 was Rs.4,16,36,625.

2. Briefly stated, the original return of income of the company for A.Y 2004-05 was filed on 8.11.2004 returning an income of Rs.1,40,090. The company was liquidated on 27.03.2008 and notice u/s 148 was issued on the company on 14.03.2011. Notice u/s 148 was served on M/s SRSR Advisory Pvt Ltd. In response to the notice issued u/s 148 to the company, the erstwhile Director of the company Sri N. Rama Raju replied that the company was liquidated on 27.03.2008. Assessment proceedings continued by way of issue of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.08.2011.

3. We find that the CIT (A) findings are similar to that of in ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014. Hence we are of the opinion that the Page 7 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

issuance of notice u/s 148 on a different company namely M/s. SRSR Advisory (P) Ltd makes the proceedings void ab initio as notice has been issued to the wrong entity. Hence we confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the Revenue appeal.

4. In the Result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

ITA No.1881/Hyd/2014 1. The assessment which was being appealed against before the CIT (A) is on the company M/s Jyotsna Properties Pvt. Ltd for A.Y 2004-05. The AO completed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act on 30.12.2011. The demand raised was Rs.2,88,50,431. The only addition made u/s 68 was Rs.4,16,65,700.

2. Briefly stated, the original return of income of the company for A.Y 2004-05 was filed on 8.11.2004 returning an income of Rs.93,280. The company was liquidated on 15.03.2008 and notice u/s 148 was issued on the company on 14.03.2011. Notice u/s 148 was served on M/s SRSR Advisory Pvt Ltd. In response to the notice issued u/s 148 to the company, the erstwhile Director of the company Sri N. Rama Raju replied that the company was liquidated on 15.03.2008. Assessment proceedings continued by way of issue of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.08.2011.

3. We find that the CIT (A) findings are similar to that of in ITA No.1877/Hyd/2014. Hence we are of the opinion that the issuance of notice u/s 148 on a different company namely M/s. SRSR Advisory (P) Ltd makes the proceedings void ab initio as

Page 8 of 9 ITA Nos. 1877 to 1881 of 2014 NSLR Prasad Raju and Others Hyderabad

notice has been issued to the wrong entity. Hence we confirm the order of the CIT (A) and dismiss the Revenue appeal.

4. In the Result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

5. To sum up, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29th July, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (B. Ramakotaiah) (Asha Vijayaraghavan) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Hyderabad, dated 29th July, 2015. Vnodan/sps Copy to:

1. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2) 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 04

2. Shri N.S.L.R. Prasad Raju, H.No.B-55 Flat No.202, Sai Vaishnavi Vihar, Vengala Rao Nagar, SR Nagar, Hyderabad 500038

3. Shri D.Srinivasa Raju, H.No.75, Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad 500038

4. Shri N. Rama Raju,H.No.1-11-191/1, Flat No.302 Shamala Buildings, Begumpet, Hyderabad 500016

5. Commissioner of Wealth Tax(A)-VII Hyderabad

6. Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Central) Hyderabad

7. The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad

8. Guard File By Order

Page 9 of 9