Rajanna P V , Chikkaballapur V. The Income TAx Officer Ward-1 , Chikkaballapur

ITA 1359/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5958 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TSHERING ONGDA
• Assessee Lawyers: H N KHINCHA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1 359 / BANG/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014 - 15 SHRI RAJANNA P. V., NO. E-1098, MADHAVNAGAR, GAURIBIDANUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR 561 208. PAN: ABXPR5297C VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, CHIKKABALLAPURA. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI H.N. KHINCHA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TSHERING ONGDA , JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 26 .0 6 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 .0 6 .2018 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-6, BANGALORE DATED 21.12.2017 FOR ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER. 1. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ERRED IN TREATING A TO TAL SUM OF RS. 27,93,000/- AS UNEXPLAINEDCASH DEPOSITS IN VARIOUS BANKS AND TAXING THE SAME U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND THE LEARNED COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. THE ADDITION AS MADE/SUSTAINED BEING CONTRARY TO FACTS AND EVIDENCE AVAILABLE IS TO BE DELETED. 2. IN ANY CASE, THE ADDITION AS MADE RELYING UPON A IR INFORMATION BEING BAD IN LAW AND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 3. IN ANY CASE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED IN NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND THE EVIDENCE AVAILABLE. ON PROPER APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE AND FACTS OF THE CASE IT W ILL CLEAR THAT THERE ARE NO UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK AND TH EREFORE THE ENTIRE ADDITION AS MADE SUSTAINED REQUIRES TO BE DELETED. ITA NO. 1359/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND ON OTHER GROUNDS TO BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER BE QUASHED OR AT LEAST THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BE DELETED. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF ASSESSEE THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A) IS VERY CRYPTIC AND THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED B ACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR FRESH DECISION BY WAY OF A SPEAKING AND REASONED OR DER. THE LD. DR OF REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. AR OF ASSESSEE BECAUSE WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS REPRODUCED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. AR OF ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER, T HE APPEAL WAS DECIDED IN A VERY CRYPTIC MANNER AND HENCE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORD ER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION BY W AY OF A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH SIDES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R BANGALORE, DATED, THE 28 TH JUNE, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.