Abdul Samad Bawa, Puttur V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Puttur

ITA 1247/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 124721114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VANAJA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

ITA.1247/BANG/2014 PAGE - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'C', BANGALORE SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO.1247/BANG/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI. ABDUL SAMAD BAWA, PROP : M/S. BAWA JEWELLERS, COURT ROAD, PUTTUR .. APPELLANT PAN : ABRPB4032F V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, PUTTUR .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SMT. M. R. VANAJA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI. SUNIL KUMAR AGARWALA, JCIT HEARD ON : 17.12.2015 PRONOUNCED ON :28 .12.2015 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE, IT HAS ALTOGETHE R TAKEN TEN GROUNDS OF WHICH GROUNDS 2 AND 3 SAY THAT CIT (A) HAD PASSED T HE ORDER IN VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY WITHOUT GIVING REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE. ITA.1247/BANG/2014 PAGE - 2 02. AO HAD MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.7 LAKHS BASED ON CERTAIN DISCREPANCIES IN STOCK ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN FOUND A T THE TIME OF SURVEY. ASSESSEE WAS A JEWELLER. IT SEEMS ASSESSEE OFFERED AN INCOME OF RS.7 LAKHS AT THE TIME OF SURVEY, BUT WHEN HE FILED THE RETURN THE SAID INCOME WAS NOT SHOWN. AO HAD CONSIDERED THE EXCESS STOCK IN SILVE R ARTICLES AND THE EXCESS GOLD JEWELLERY FOUND AT THE TIME OF SURVEY A ND WORKED OUT A VALUE OF SUCH EXCESS STOCK AT RS.6,88,896/-. ASSESSEE HAD F ILED THE RETURN DECLARING INCOME ON PRESUMPTIVE BASIS U/S.44AF OF THE ACT. H OWEVER, AO DID NOT ACCEPT THIS RETURN. HE COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.7 LAKHS. 03. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A), IT SEEMS HE DID NOT ENTER APPEARANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEA RING. CIT (A) AFTER GOING THROUGH THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE CO NFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 04. BEFORE US, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT OPPORTUNITY WA S NOT GIVEN BY THE CIT (A) BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 05. PER CONTRA, LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LOWE R AUTHORITIES. ITA.1247/BANG/2014 PAGE - 3 06. I HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL C ONTENTIONS. THE CASE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN POSTED BY THE CIT (A) FOR HEARIN G ON THREE DATES VIZ., 03.12.2013, 26.12.2013 AND 19.03.2014. THE GAP BET WEEN THE FIRST TWO DATES WAS ONLY 23 DAYS RENDERING THE SECOND OPPORTU NITY A VIRTUAL NON- STARTER. THUS ASSESSEE WAS EFFECTIVELY GIVEN ONLY TWO CHANCES OF SUPPORTING ITS CASE WITH NECESSARY EVIDENCE. IN TH E CIRCUMSTANCES I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN BE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE. TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT (A) A ND REMIT THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT (A) TO DECIDE IT AFRESH IN ACCORDAN CE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER IF T HE ASSESSEE DOES NOT ENTER APPEARANCE BEFORE CIT (A) ON THE APPOINTED DA TE, CIT (A) SHALL DECIDE THE ISSUES ON MERITS AS PER AVAILABLE RECORD . 07. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- (ABRAHAM P GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER MCN ITA.1247/BANG/2014 PAGE - 4 COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A) 5. DR 6. GF, ITAT, BANGALORE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR