Mahesh Steel Traders, Himatnagar V. The Income tax Officer,S.K.Ward-3, Himatnagar

ITA 1069/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9736 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2010
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVETIA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE S/SHRI G. D. AGARWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT AND MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA.NO.1069/AHD/2010 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007] MAHESH STEEL TRADERS AT. DHANDHA IDAR ROAD, HIMATNAGAR (DIST. S.K.). VS. ITO, SK WARD-3 HIMATNAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.N.DIVETIA REVENUE BY : SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN O R D E R G.D. AGARWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V I, AHMEDABAD DATED 24.11.2009 ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS AS UNDER: 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND/OR ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,78,460/- U/S.69A/60C BEING THE CASH PURCHASE MADE BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE ABOVE PURCHASES WERE MADE UNDER THE CONCEPT OF THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY. THE OTHER GROUNDS ARE ONLY ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE GROUND NO.1. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT IS STATED B Y THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO CALLED FO R DETAILS FROM CERTAIN PARTIES BEHIND THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT SUPPLYING THOSE MATERIALS TO THE ASSESSEE ARRIVED AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE W AS UNEXPLAINED CASH PAYMENT ITA.NO.1069/AHD/2010 -2- BY THE ASSESSEE. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT EITHE R THE ADDITION SHOULD BE DELETED OR THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO TH E FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO SUPPLY THE COPY OF THE MATERIAL COLLEC TED BEHIND THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON T HE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BO TH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. IT IS SETTL ED LAW THAT ANY MATERIAL COLLECTED BEHIND BACK OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE UTI LISED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE UNLESS THE COPY OF THE SAME IS SUPPLY TO THE ASSESS EE AND HE IS ALLOWED AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE SAME. IN THIS CASE, THE A O HAS COLLECTED CERTAIN MATERIAL BEHIND THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS AL SO UTILISED THE SAME WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT SUPPLYING THE COPY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW ON THIS POINT AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO. WE DIRECT H IM TO SUPPLY THE COPY OF EVIDENCES COLLECTED BY HIM AND THEREAFTER ALLOW ADE QUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ANY MATERIAL IN REBUTTAL OR EXP LANATION THEREOF. THEREAFTER HE WILL RE-ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.D. AGARWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT PLACE : AHMEDABAD DATE : 17-09-2010 ITA.NO.1069/AHD/2010 -3- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD