Pravash Narayan Mallick, Chhatia V. ITO, Jajpur Ward, Jajpur

ITA 128/CTK/2022

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Pravash Narayan Mallick against the order of the CIT(A), Cuttack, concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee, an individual running a colour lab and earning rental income, had reported an income of Rs.7,85,400. However, the Assessing Officer assessed a turnover of Rs.1,83,29,300, including a housing loan deposit of Rs.1,14,42,560 as turnover, which the assessee contested. The assessee was unable to represent his case effectively at the CIT(A) level due to not receiving a notice of hearing. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300447 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE Pravash Narayan GopapurChhak, Chhatia, Barchana, Dist: Jajpur PAN/GIR No. (Appellant This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A) , Cuttack, assessment year 2. Shri Sandeep S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is an individual, who is deriving income from running of a colour lab in the name and style of M/s. P.P.Digital & Colour Lab and also from rental income from house property, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL ITA No.128/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Pravash Narayan Mallick, At: GopapurChhak, Chhatia, Barchana, Dist: Jajpur Vs. ITO, Jajpur Ward, JaJpur PAN/GIR No.AJUPM 4029 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 19 /0 Date of Pronouncement : 19/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld , Cuttack, dated 10.1.2020 in Appeal No.0565/2016 assessment year 2014-15. Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is an individual, who is deriving income from running of a colour lab in the name and style of M/s. ital & Colour Lab and also from rental income from house property, Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , CUTTACK JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO, Jajpur Ward, Respondent) Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR 04/2023 /04/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 0565/2016-17 for the Kumar Jena, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is an individual, who is deriving income from running of a colour lab in the name and style of M/s. ital & Colour Lab and also from rental income from house property, ITA No.128/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page2 | 3 etc. The assessee had filed his return of income disclosing income of Rs.7,85,400/-. In the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer had taken the entire transaction from the bank account of the assessee and had determined the turnover of the assessee at Rs.1,83,29,300/-. It was the submission that an amount of Rs.1,14,42,560/- was a housing loan, which was deposited in the bank account of the assessee. It was the submission that this has been considered as turnover of the assessee. It was the submission that the assesse was unable to represent his case before the ld CIT(A) as the notice of hearing had not been received by the assessee. It was the prayer that the issues in the appeal may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and the assessee would be able to substantiate his case before the Assessing Officer that the loan of Rs.1,14,42,560/- was not to be considered as the turnover of the assessee. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing officer and ld CIT(A). 5. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case shows that there are loan transactions in respect of housing loan taken from Odisha Gramya Bank. It is also noticed that the Assessing Officer has not considered the loan. It is also noticed that the Assessing Officer has treated the said loan as the turnover of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal are restored to ITA No.128/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page3 | 3 the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/04/2023. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 19/04/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Pravash Narayan Mallick, At: GopapurChhak, Chhatia, Barchana, Dist: Jajpur 2. The Respondent: ITO, Jajpur Ward, JaJpur 3. The CIT(A)-, Cuttack 4. Pr.CIT-, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//