M.Swarnalatha Dangia, Salem V. ITO, Salem

ITA 1027/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95838 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B NISCHAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , . !' , # $ % [ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.1027/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SMT. SWARNALATHA DANGIA C/O SHRI N SANTHANAKRISHNAN 4/3 GROUND FLOOR, 4 TH CROSS MARAVANERI EXTN. SALEM 636 007 VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD I(4) SALEM [PAN AIOPD 9333 M] ( &' / APPELLANT) ( ()&' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : DR. B NISCHAL, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 06 - 07 - 2015 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 - 08 - 2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), SALEM, D ATED 27.3.2014 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. SHRI G. BASKAR, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.1027/14 :- 2 -: ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE FILED H ER RETURN OF INCOME AT SALEM. HOWEVER, SHIFTED HER RESIDENCE TO MUMBAI DUE TO EMPLOYMENT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FIL E THE RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. BEFORE THE C IT(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED ALL THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FOR COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT. THE INFORMATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALL OTHER RE LEVANT DETAILS WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AFTER EXAMINING THE MATTER, OBJECTED TO THE FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS NOT FILED BEFORE HIM. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ONCE T HE CIT(A) ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND CALLED FOR THE REMAND R EPORT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE EXAMINED THE SAME AND SUBMITT ED HIS VIEW ON MERITS OF THE MATTER. THEREFORE, THE LD. COUNSEL S UBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) REJECTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE ON THE BASIS OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT J USTIFIED. HENCE, THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED BACK FOR RE-EXAMINATION. 3. WE HEARD DR. B. NISCHAL, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE ALSO. 4. THE ASSESSEE BY A LETTER DATED 11.9.2013 FILED ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A(1)(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX RUL ES BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT EXAMINING T HE MATERIAL FILED BY ITA NO.1027/14 :- 3 -: THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS, FOUND THAT THE MATTER REQUI RES CROSS- EXAMINATION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF THE CO PY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE FILED. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBJECTED TO THE FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. THE CIT(A), BY EXTRACTING THE OBJECTION, REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. T HIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE FILED AD DITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) CALLED FOR THE REM AND REPORT, IT IS OBLIGATORY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE DETAILS ON MERITS AND FILE HIS REPORT. IN THIS CASE, THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE MATTER ON MERITS. ACCORDINGLY, TH E ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSU E IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING O FFICER SHALL RE- EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THEREAFTER D ECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.1027/14 :- 4 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH AUGUST, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ' ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED: 14 TH AUGUST, 2015 RD &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. + / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. ),- . / DR 3. +/' / CIT(A) 6. -01 / GF