SHRI SUNIL KAUSHAL, Bhopal V. THE ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

ITA 106/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5895 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Assessee Lawyers: S N AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Tangible material
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

SUNIL KOUSHAL ITA NO. 106/IND/2015 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM & SHRI O.P. MEENA, AM ITA NO. 106/IND/2015 A.Y.2007-08 SUNIL KAUSHAL PROP.M/S SATYAM INDUSTRIES BHOPAL PAN AFXPK 3322Q ::: APPELLANT VS ACIT 3(1) BHOPAL ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL AND SHRI PANKAJ MOGRA RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED DATE OF HEARING 2 .8.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 .8.2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) BHOPAL-2 DATED 22.12.2014 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- SUNIL KOUSHAL ITA NO. 106/IND/2015 2 1.1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN RECORDING THE FINDING THAT NOTICE U/S 148 HAS BEEN FOUND ISSUED AFTER DULY RECORDING THE REASONS EVEN WHEN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AND NOTHING WAS ESCAPED BY THE ASSESSEE. 1.2 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LD. A.O. ALSO ERRED IN ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT EVEN WHEN NO TANGIBLE MATERIAL WAS FOUND IN POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE AS TO PROVE THE CONCEALMENT OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE. 1.3 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE NOTICE AS ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT AND ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED THEREOF NOW REQUIRES TO BE QUASHED. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN MAINTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.800116/- ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION ON THE COST OF THE PLANT & MACHINERY WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE HIM. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND HEARING THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT NOW RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WAS NEVER RAISED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THIS ISSUE GOES TO THE VERY ROOT OF THE M ATTER, IT SUNIL KOUSHAL ITA NO. 106/IND/2015 3 WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FIL E OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME DE NOVO AFTER GIVING THE PARTIES A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE ORDE R ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 2 ND AUGUST, 2016 SD/- SD/- (O.P. MEENA) (D.T. G ARASIA) ACCOUNTANTMEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER 8 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 DN/- SUNIL KOUSHAL ITA NO. 106/IND/2015 4