Dr. Kirti Narayan Jha, V. DCIT,

ITA 105/RAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0358 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 1994-1995
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK ROUSHAN SR S C
• Assessee Lawyers: M K CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: CIRCUIT BENCH : RANCHI [BEFORE HONBLE S/SHRI N. S. SAINI, AM AND GEORGE M ATHAN, JM] ITA NO. 105 & 106/RAN/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1994-95 & 1995-96) DR. KIRTI NARAYAN JHA, 176/C, ROAD NO.4, ASHOK NAGAR, HINOO, RANCHI 834 002 PAN: AEPMJ2528N VS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INV. CIRCLE, RANCHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI M. K. CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI DEEPAK ROUSHAN, SR. SC DATE OF HEARING: 28-10-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28-10-2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM: THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A), RANCHI IN APPEAL NO.1 85 & 184/RAN/OTH/99-2000 DATED 08-02-2001 FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY. 2. SHRI M. K. CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI DEEPAK RAKSHIT, LEARNED SR. STAND ING COUNSEL REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND WAS WORKING AS RE GIONAL DIRECTOR, RANCHI IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT O F BIHAR. AFTER DETECTION OF THE FODDER SCAM IN THE ANIMAL HUSBANDR Y DEPARTMENT, ITA NO.105 & 106/RAN/2014 [AYS: 1994-95 & 1995-96] 2 THE ASSESSEE WAS IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY DURING THE COU RSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS ALSO IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. I T WAS A SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PROVI DE ALL THE DETAILS AND EXPLANATION IN REGARD TO THE AO DURING THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS TO THE LEARNED CIT(A). IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SUBS TANTIATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE AO. TO THIS SUBMISSION, THE LEARNED STAN DING COUNSEL DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTIONS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS AD MITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TH E LEARNED CIT(A), IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUES IN B OTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBST ANTIATE HIS CLAIM. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE CLOSE OF HEARING ON 28-10-2015. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (GEORGE MATHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 28.10.15 LK DEKA/SR.PS ITA NO.105 & 106/RAN/2014 [AYS: 1994-95 & 1995-96] 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - 5. THE DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 28.10.15 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 28.10.15 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 28.10.15 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 28.10. 15 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 28.10.15 S R.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.10.15 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 28.10.15 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER