Sheikh Abdus Sabur (Prop. of Kalyani Seed Farm), Barakar V. ACIT, Circle-Bankura, Bankura

ITA 104/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4590 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-01-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: BRIJESH KR SINGH
• Section: 133A

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 104/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 104 /KOL/ 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 SHEIKH ABDUS SABUR,................................ ..............................APPELLANT (PROP. OF KALYANI SEED FARM), VILL. & P.O. RASULPUR, BANKURA-722 205 [PAN : AJZPS 8850 Q] -VS.- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,.............. ..................RESPONDENT CIRCLE-BANKURA, BILASH BHAWAN, CHANDMARIDANGA, BANKURA APPEARANCES BY: SHRI BRIJESH KR. SINGH, ADVOCATE, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI M.K. BISWAS, JCIT, D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JULY 12, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JULY 14, 2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DURGAPUR DATE D 13.10.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROCESSING AND TRADING IN SEEDS UND ER THE NAME AND STYLE OF HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN M/S. KALYANI SEED FARM. A SURVEY UNDER SECTION 133A WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE BUSINESS PREMIS ES OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING TW O SETS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE BALANCE-SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUN T FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY REFLECTED CERTAIN FIGURES OF SUNDR Y DEBTORS, SUNDRY I.T.A. NO. 104/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 2 OF 3 CREDITORS AND CAPITAL INTRODUCTION, WHICH WERE DIFF ERENT FROM THE BALANCE-SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. ALTHOUGH IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID BALANCE-SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT WERE P REPARED AND GOT AUDITED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING LOAN FROM BANK, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE SAME. HE HELD THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD CERTAINLY EARNED MORE INCOME THAN WHAT WAS DISCLOSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCOME- TAX AND ESTIMATING SUCH UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS.20 ,00,000/-, HE MADE ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TO THA T EXTENT IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3)/147 VIDE AN ORDER DATED 31.12.2010. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 143(3)/147, AN APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO SATISFACTORY CO MPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) PROCEEDED T O DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE ON MERIT AND CONFIR MED THE ADDITION OF RS.20,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APP EALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LIMITED RELIEF SOUGHT BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN ORDER TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PUT FORTH HIS CASE AS THE NOTICE OF THE LAST HEARING FI XED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHIC H RESULTED IN HIS NON- COMPLIANCE. ALTHOUGH THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTION , IT IS OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS A SIMILAR NON-COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF T HE ASSESSEE EVEN TO THE EARLIER NOTICES OF HEARING ISSUED BY THE LD. CI T(APPEALS). IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPOR TUNITY CAN BE GIVEN I.T.A. NO. 104/KOL./2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 3 OF 3 TO THE ASSESSEE AS SOUGHT BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF COST. ACC ORDINGLY, I DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PAY A SUM OF RS.5,000/- TO THE PRIME MI NISTERS RELIEF FUND AND PRODUCE THE PROOF OF SUCH PAYMENT BEFORE THE LD . CIT(APPEALS) SUBJECT TO THE SAID PAYMENT, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO HIM FO R DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 14, 2016 . SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 14 TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) SHEIKH ABDUS SABUR, (PROP. OF KALYANI SEED FARM), VILL. & P.O. RASULPUR, BANKURA-722 205 (2) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-BANKURA, BILASH BHAWAN, CHANDMARIDANGA, BANKURA (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DURGAPUR (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.