Income Tax Officer Ward-6(3)(4), Bangalore V. Shri B R Dhanpal , Bangalore

ITA 1268/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5536 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P V PRADEEP KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1268/BANG/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 - 13 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(4), BANGALORE. VS. SHRI B.R. DHANPAL, NO.130, PRESTIGE QASIS, RAJANKUNTE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 004. PAN: AHKPD 8587A APP ELLANT RESPONDENT A PPELLANT BY : DR. P.V. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADDL. CIT RE SPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEAR ING : 05.03.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 . 03 .201 8 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) INTER ALIA ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IS OPPOSED TO L AW AND THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE CIT(A) ERRED IN DECIDING THE MATTER BASED ON THE FRESH EVI DENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTU NITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE SUCH EVIDENCES WHICH I S CONTRAVENED TO THE PROVISION OF RULE 46A(3). ITA NO.1268/BANG/2017 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. FOR THESE AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URG ED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. THIS APPEAL IS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 05.03.2018, BUT NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE-RESPONDENT. ON A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT NO NE APPEARED ON HIS BEHALF. THEREFORE, WE HAVE HEARD THE APPEAL EX PARTE . 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR INVITE D OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) THAT BEFORE THE CIT(APPEA LS) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF COPY O F LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENT, CONFIRMATIONS FROM M/S. ARJUN SOUHARDA PATHINA SAHA KARI NIYAMITHA AND THIS EVIDENCE WAS ACCEPTED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) WITH OUT SEEKING ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. THEREFORE IT IS A VIOLA TION OF THE PROVISION OF RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTAN CES, THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) BE SET ASIDE ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUES AN D MATTER BE RESTORED TO HIM WITH A DIRECTION TO READJUDICATE THE IMPUGNE D ISSUES RAISED BEFORE US AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A O ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 4. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SE T ASIDE ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUES AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO HIS F ILE WITH A DIRECTION TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUES AFRESH, AFTER AFFORDING OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE PARTIES. ITA NO.1268/BANG/2017 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018. SD/- SD/- ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) ( SUNIL KUMAR YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 8 TH MARCH, 2018. / D ESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.