Saitawadekar Jewellers , Chiplun V. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune 1, Pune

ITA 115/PUN/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0633 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2021
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 263; 40A(3); 143(3); 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.115/PUN/2021 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Saitawadekar Jewellers 1825 B2, Padma Talkies Bldg., Opp. Urban Bank Bazar Peth, Chiplun – 415605 Maharashtra PAN : ABKFS1814K Vs. Pr.CIT, Pune-1 Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.03.2021 passed by the ld. Pr.CIT, Pune-1 u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) in relation to the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of gold and silver ornaments, filed its return declaring total income of Assessee by Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by Shri B. Koteswara Rao Date of hearing 31-05-2022 Date of pronouncement 31-05-2022 ITA No.115/PUN/2021 Saitawadekar Jewellers 2 Rs.15,06,560/-. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 27.11.2017 accepting the income declared. The ld. Pr.CIT, on a perusal of record, observed that the assessee contravened the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and also that the income declared during the course of survey on account of excess stock amounting to Rs.30,01,449/- was not declared. These issues were found not to have been considered by the Assessing Officer at the time of completing the assessment. He issued show cause notice to the assessee on 16.02.2021 requiring it to explain its position. The assessee did not submit any reply. Thereafter, a reminder was issued on 11.03.2021 requesting the assessee to submit its reply by 15.03.2021. In the absence of the assessee furnishing any reply, the ld. Pr.CIT proceeded ex parte and held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Setting aside the assessment order, he directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to revisit the issues discussed above after allowing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is seen that the ld. Pr.CIT did not himself ITA No.115/PUN/2021 Saitawadekar Jewellers 3 adjudicate on the two issues espoused by him for revision primarily on the ground that the assessee did not furnish any reply by the stipulated date, namely, 15.03.2021. The ld. AR invited our attention towards pages 13 and 14 of paper book being e-Proceedings Response Acknowledgement, as per which the assessee uploaded its part reply on 15.03.2021. Pages 15 and 16 are again e-Proceedings Response Acknowledgement, through which the assessee furnished the remaining part of the reply to the ld. Pr.CIT on the same date. Though the assessee furnished its reply giving necessary details on 15.03.2021, being, the same date as given by the ld. Pr.CIT for making submissions, the ld. Pr.CIT passed order on 18.03.2021 without taking note of such replies. This shows that the impugned order has been passed without considering the replies of the assessee. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that it would be in the fitness of things if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. Pr.CIT. We order accordingly and direct him to pass the revisionary order afresh as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and taking into ITA No.115/PUN/2021 Saitawadekar Jewellers 4 consideration the replies already filed by the assessee and any further reply that the assessee may seek to lodge. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 31 st May, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 31 st May, 2022 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 3. 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे “B” / DR „B‟, ITAT, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune ITA No.115/PUN/2021 Saitawadekar Jewellers 5 Date 1. Draft dictated on 31-05-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 31-05-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *