M/s Joy Loknath Oil Extraction (P) Ltd., Dakshin Dinajpur V. D.C.I.T Range - Malda., Malda

ITA 122/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 12223514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S UBHAJYOTI BHATTACHARYA
• Assessee Lawyers: VARSHA JALAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 1 22 / KOL ./20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1 22 / KOL / 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 20 0 9 M/S. JOY LOKNATH OIL EXTRACTION (P) LIMITED, . ... .... . APPELLANT PROP. OF M/S. PAUL BROTHERS, GANGARAMPUR, DAKSHIN DINAJPUR - 733 124 [PAN: AABCJ 3792 L] - VS. - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,..................... . RESPONDE NT MALDA RANGE, NETAJI COMMERCIAL ESTATE, RATH BARI, MALDA - 732 101 APPEAR ANCES BY: SMT. VARSHA JALAN, ADVOCATE, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI S UBHAJYOTI BHATTACHARYA, J CIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : AUGUST 04 , 2 01 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUGUST 06 , 201 5 O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA : THIS A PPEAL HA S BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , JALPAIGURI D ATED 25 . 1 0 .20 1 2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 0 9 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND S OF APPEAL: - ( 1 ) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING AN EXPARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 2. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CI Y( A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION OF R S.12,81,144/ - MADE BY THE A.O. BY APPLYING GROSS PROFIT RATE ON ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED EXCESS DEPOSITS OF RS.1,87,57,603/ - IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 3. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ENHANCING THE ADDITION OF RS.12,81,144/ - MENTIONED IN GROUND NO. 2 TO I.T.A. NO . 1 22 / KOL ./20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 2 OF 3 RS.I,87,57,603/ - BY WRONGLY TREATING THE ENTIRE ALLEGED EXCESS DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS.1,87,57,603 / - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U / S 68. 4. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CI T( A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCES OF RS.6,000 / - , RS.19,382/ - AND RS.9,23,942/- MADE BY THE A.O. UNDER THE HEAD RENT & TAXES, INSURANCE AND BANK CHARGES RESPECTIVELY. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESESE COMPANY , IN THE R ELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, WAS ENGAGED IN THE PRODUCTION OF ATTA, FLOUR AND SUJI. IT HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.9,72,055/ - . THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 22,53,198/ - AND AT RS.6,15,089/ - UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL EX - PARTE ON MERITS. BEING AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE HAS INTER ALIA, TAKEN A GROUND THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING THE EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS OF THE CASE. ADMITTEDLY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BE PROVIDED SO THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY CLARIFY THE VARIOUS ISSUES. IT IS TRUE THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAD GIVEN VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(APPEALS) FOR PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE MAY CLARIFY THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE FULL COOPERATION TO THE CIT(APPEALS) IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH AUGUST , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - MAHAVIR SINGH S.V. MEHROTRA ( JUDICIAL MEMBER) ( ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 6 TH D AY OF AUGUST , 201 5 I.T.A. NO . 1 22 / KOL ./20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 8 - 20 0 9 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. JOY LOKNATH OIL EXTRACTION (P) LIMITED, PROP. OF M/S. PAUL BROTHERS, GANGARAMPUR, DAKSHIN DINAJPUR - 733 124 (2) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MALDA RANGE, NETAJI COMMERCIAL ESTATE, RATH BARI, MALDA - 732 101 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - JALPAIGURI (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - , KOLKATA ( 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ( 6 ) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR IN COME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA B ENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S .