ITO, Ward 9(3), Pune, Pune V. M/s. Raviraj Engineers, Pune

ITA 1347/PUN/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7482 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HEMAND KUMAR C LEUVA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. I.T.A. NO. 1347/PN/2005 ASS ESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, M/S RAVIRAJ ENGINEERS, WARD-9(3), PUNE. VS. S NO 49/1, TATHAWADE, PUNE. APPELLANT. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI HEMAND KUMAR C. LEUVA. RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-III, PUNE DATED 30 TH MARCH, 2005, DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS.7,54,795/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON ADVANCE/LOAN FOR NON-BUSINESS PURPOSES AND DISALLOWANCE OF RS.10,74,292/- MADE BY THE AO AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRE SENT THE CASE. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED DR, FOR THE REVENUE, MENTIONED AND DEMONSTRATED CONCLUSIVELY THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) WAS PASSED AT THE BACK OF THE ITA NO. 1347/PN/2005 ITO VS. M/S RAVIRAJ ENGINEERS. 2 AO AFTER ENTERTAINING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND WITHOUT REMANDING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMIT TED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO AND AN OPPORTUNI TY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE AO AS PER THE ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUS TICE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSED THE ORD ERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. ON A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, W E OBSERVE THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) IN PARA 5.2 OBSERVED AS UNDER : THE APPELLANTS REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCED THE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED AND SHOWED THAT THE INTEREST HAS BEEN PAID AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED READ WITH SECTIO N 40(B)(V)(I) OF THE IT ACT. HENCE THE GROUND IS ALLOWED AND ADDITION IS DELETED. FURTHER, IN PARA 6 ON PAGE 7 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND IN THE LAST LINE, THE CIT(APPEALS) STATED AS UNDER : THE ASSESSEE ALSO PRODUCED COPIES OF THE SUPPORTING EVI DENCES AS MENTIONED IN THE SAID LETTER. FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) H AS ENTERTAINED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHILE GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE AO WAS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE REBUTTAL. AT LEASE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DOES NOT INDICATE THE SAME. IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS VI OLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED T O THE FILE OF THE AO. 4. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APP EALS) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATIO N OF THE ISSUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE AO SHALL GRANT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL FILE ALL THE EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR ITA NO. 1347/PN/2005 ITO VS. M/S RAVIRAJ ENGINEERS. 3 FACILITATING THE AO TO TAKE FRESH DECISION IN ALL THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL NOW. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THE GROUNDS ARE SET ASIDE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) ( D.KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 16 TH MARCH, 2011 WAKODE COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. ACIT, 3. CIT- 4. D.R. ITAT B BENCH BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T PUNE