SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA, JAIPUR V. ITO, WARD-6 (2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 122/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4838 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2020
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANCHAL MEENA ACIT DHK
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Non passing of speaking order; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 69C; 80C; 143(3); 147; 69

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 122/JP/2020 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA F-25, JAMNA LAL BAJAJ MARG, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE ITO, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AMVPS 3969 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANOOP BHATIA (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : MISS CHANCHAL MEENA (ACIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 14/10/2020 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :15 /10/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 15.11.2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2007-08. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(APPEALS)-2, JAIPUR BY DISMISSIN G THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE DESPITE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REQUESTI NG THE ADJOURNMENT IS INVALID IN LAW AND AGAINST THE CONCE PT OF NATURAL ITA NO. 122/JP/20 SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA VS. ITO 2 JUSTICE EVEN. THE SAID ORDER NEEDS TO BE DECLARED I NVALID IN LAW AND ACCORDINGLY BE QUASHED. 2. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2) IS NOT CLEAR IN HIS A SSESSMENT ORDER THAT WHETHER THE ADDITION MADE BY HIM IN HIS OPINIO N FALLS INTO SECTION 69 OR SECTION 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 196 1. CONSEQUENTLY THE ADDITION MADE IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW HENCE N EEDS TO BE QUASHED. 3. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY LD. INCOME TA X OFFICER WARD 6(2), JAIPUR THEREBY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 4,44,074/- UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 IS ARBI TRARY IN NATURE, BASED ON SURMISESAND CONTRARY TO THE SETTLED POSITI ON OF LAW HENCE LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 4. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR ALSO ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE DEDUCTION OF RS.16,312/- UNDER SECTION 80C OF THE I NCOME TAX TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR GROSSLY ERRED IN DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT A SSESSMENT YEAR AT RS. 5,36,960/- THEREFORE SAME DESERVES TO BE QUASHE D. 6. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR ERRED IN INITIATING PROC EEDINGS UNDER ITA NO. 122/JP/20 SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA VS. ITO 3 SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND S AME IS REQUIRED TO BE QUASHED. 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, ALTER, AME ND OR MODIFY THE GROUND(S) OF THE APPEAL. 2. HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONCLUDED THROUGH VIDE O CONFERENCE DUE TO PREVAILING COVID-19 PANDEMIC SITUATION. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGN ED EX-PARTE ORDER AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY REFUSING TH E ADJOURNMENT SOUGHT BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR N ON APPEARANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HEA RING AS THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO SUBMIT CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES TO SU PPORT HIS CLAIM. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECLINED TO GRANT THE ADJOURNMENT APPLI CATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE. THUS, THE LD. AR O F THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) SO TH AT THE ASSESSEE CAN FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A)HAS GRANTED AS MANY AS 14 OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE DID ITA NO. 122/JP/20 SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA VS. ITO 4 NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS OR FILED ANY WRITTEN SUB MISSIONS. THUS, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS HAVING NO OPTION BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEA L EX-PARTE. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, AFFIDAV ITS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF T HE LD. CIT(A). THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRANTED SUFFICIE NT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE HOWEVER, KEPT ON SEEKI NG ADJOURNMENT. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCE WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE VERIFIED BY THE AUTHORITY BELOW, THEREFORE, NON SPEAKING ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY MAKE OUT A CASE FOR GRANT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF H EARING TO THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHEN THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT DISCUSSED THE MERIT OF THE CASE AND FURTHER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS SEEKING TIME TO FILE THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRES ENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE RECORD OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IF ANY FILE BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 122/JP/20 SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA VS. ITO 5 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON15 /10/2020. SD/- FOT; IKY JKO (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;KF;D LNL; @ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 15/10/2020 *SANTOSH VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKH @ THE RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 122/JP/2020) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR