ITO,Wd. 1(4), Kolhapur V. Shri Bhaskar Shankar Thakur Gargoti, Kolhapur

ITA 1115/PUN/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7387 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY DAMLE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 69; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. SR.NO. ITA NO. A.Y. APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1. 1113/PN/2009 1999-00 ITO WARD 1(4) KOLHAPUR BHASKAR SHANKAR THAKUR GARGOTI, TAL. BHUDARGAD, DIST. KOLHAPUR PAN AAOPT 5321 R 2. 1114/PN/2009 2001-02 -DO- -DO- 3. 1115/PN/2009 2002-03 -DO- -DO- APPELLANT BY : SHRI ABHAY DAMLE RESPONDENTS BY : NONE O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, A.M. THESE THREE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE RAISING COMMON ISSUES IN RESPECT OF SAME ASSESSEE, WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DI SPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. TH OUGH NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. WE THEREFORE, PROCEED TO DECIDE THESE APPEALS AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 2. THE COMMON GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVEN UE READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE AD DITION RIGHTLY MADE BY THE A.O U/S 69 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON THE BASIS OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HE CASE AND IN LAW THE CIT(A) HAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE AND THEREBY VIOLATING THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN RULE 46-A OF T HE I.T. RULES, 1962. 3. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BE VACATED AND THAT OF THE A.O BE RESTORED. 3. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED DR THAT IN THESE CASES, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE RESPECT OF THE SOURCES OF THE DEPOSITS MADE IN VARI OUS ACCOUNTS BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS BEEN DENIED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ITA NO. 1113 TO1115/PN/2009 BHASKAR SHANKAR THAKUR A.Y. 1999-00,2001-02 & 2002-03 2 HAVE BEEN VIOLATED. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, TH E LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT( A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUES RAISED IN THESE APPEALS AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTU NITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSING THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT AFFORDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING IS THE ESSENCE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHICH HAS BEEN VIOLATED IN THESE CASES. UNDER THES E CIRCUMSTANCES, WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DI RECTION TO DECIDE THE ISSUES AFTER AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE. SINCE WE ARE RESTORING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE, WE ARE REFRAINED TO COMMENT ON T HE MERITS OF THE ISSUE AT HAND. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST DAY OF MARCH, 2011. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) ( D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 31 ST MARCH, 2011 ANKAM COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT- KOLHAPUR 4. CIT(A) KOLHAPUR 5. D.R. ITAT A BENCH BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T PUNE