Vikram Kiyawat, Pune V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, (OSD), Ward -7(1), Pune

ITA 109/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2454 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 56(2)

Judgement Text

] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO.109/PUN/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 SHRI VIKRAM DILIP KIYAWAT, A-22, ASHIYANA PALACE, BUND GARDEN ROAD, PUNE 411 001. PAN : AJIPK3668D. . / APPELLANT V/S THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , (OSD), WARD 7(1), PUNE. . / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE. REVENUE BY : SHRI M.K. VERMA. / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) PUNE-5, PUNE DATED 10.09.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON R ECORD ARE AS UNDER :- ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND STATED TO BE HAVING INCOME FROM BUSINESS. ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2 015- 16 ON 30.09.2015 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.8,81,130/-. TH E CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER, ASSESSME NT WAS / DATE OF HEARING : 11.03.2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12.03.2019 2 ITA NO.109/PUN/2019 FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DT.27.12.2017 AN D THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.36,31,130/-. AGGRIEVED BY TH E ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO VID E ORDER DT.10.09.2018 (IN APPEAL NO.PN/CIT(A)-5/ITO, WARD 7(1)/PUNE / 10264/2017-18) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVE D BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS I N DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT FOR NON-ATTENDANCE WHEN TH ERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR HIS NON-COMPLIANCE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN STATING THAT THE APPELLANT CHOSE NOT TO PURSUE THE MATTER, WHEN ADJOURNMENT LE TTER WAS RECEIVED BY THE CIT(A) WELL BEFORE HEARING DATE. 3. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING DEMAND OF RS.11 ,11,920/-. 4. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN NOT CONSIDERING GROUND OF APPEAL SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF SUBMISSION OF APPEAL. 5. THE ORDER IS BAD IN LAW. 3. ALL THE GROUNDS BEING INTER-CONNECTED ARE CONSIDERED TOGETHER. 4. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED. WE T HEREFORE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EXPARTE QUA THE ASSES SEE BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING THE LD.D.R. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AO NOTICE D THAT ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED A PROPERTY AT WADGAONSH ERI, PUNE ON 15.04.2014 FOR RS.3,18,00,000/- AS AGAINST THE MARKET RATE OF RS.45,50,000/-. ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AND SHOW CA USE AS 3 ITA NO.109/PUN/2019 TO WHY THE AMOUNT OF RS.27,50,000/- (RS.3,45,50,000/- - RS.3,18,00,000/-) NOT BE ADDED TO HIS TOTAL INCOME U/S 56(2) (VII) OF THE ACT. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE AO AND HENCE, THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT W AS TREATED AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ADDED IT TO THE INCOME OF ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSE E CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO VIDE EX-PARTE ORDER DISM ISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ASS ESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL. 6. BEFORE US, LD.D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AO AND LD.CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.D.R. AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT GROUND IS WITH RESPECT TO ADDITION OF RS.27,50,000/- U/S 56(2)(VII) OF THE ACT. THE PERUSAL OF ORDE R OF LD.CIT(A) REVEALS THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE O RDER WITHOUT DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERITS. I N VIEW OF THE WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEA RING SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO THE PARTIES AND NO PARTY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY BE GRANTED TO ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE. WE THERE FORE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSU E ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO STATE THAT LD .CIT(A) SHALL GRANT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PROMPTLY FURNISH ALL THE DETA ILS CALLED FOR BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO LD.CIT(A), WE ARE NOT ADJUDICATING ON MERITS THE GROUNDS 4 ITA NO.109/PUN/2019 OF THE APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 12 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019. SD/- SD/- ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 12 TH MARCH, 2019. YAMINI #$%&'(' % / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. 4. 5 6. CIT(A)-5, PUNE. PR. CIT-4, PUNE. '#$ %%&',) &', *+ / DR, ITAT, SMC PUNE; $-.// GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // 012%3&4 / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ) &' , / ITAT, PUNE.