Shri Krishan Jaglan, Jind V. ITO, W-2, Jind

ITA 1390/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0443 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SUDARSHAN JCIT DR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 69; 148; 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH A, CHANDIGARH .., !' '# $, % &' BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, J M ITA NO. 1390/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SH. KRISHAN JAGLAN S/O SH. OM PRAKASH V & P.O. JALALPUR KALAN, JIND THE ITO WARD-2, JIND PAN NO: AQJPK8922A APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIKHIL GOYAL, ADVOCATE & SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, C.A #!' REVENUE BY : SHRI ARVIND SUDARSHAN, JCIT DR $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 16/06/2020 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/06/2020 &(/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 30/07/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-5 LUDHIANA. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L: 1. THE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 HAD NOT BEEN SERVED WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 149(1). HENCE, THE ASSESSM ENT DONE WITHOUT SERVING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT REASSESSMENT CONCLUDED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT WITHOUT REQUISITE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE IS BAD IN LAW. 3. ADDITIONS AMOUNTING RS. 56,58,414/- AS UNEXPLAIN ED INVESTMENTS UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 IS WITHOUT FACTUAL CO NSIDERATION AND BASED ON PURELY CONJECTURES AND SURMISES. 2 4. THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN THE DECISION ON ME RITS, EVEN THOUGH THE REASON FOR DEPOSITS WAS EXPLAINED. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEARD OR DISPOSED OFF. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT NO NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A), AND THAT THE A.O. ALSO PASSED THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ACT) EXPARTE, WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HE REQUESTED TO SET ASIDE THE CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. C IT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONA BLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSION THE LD. SR. DR ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID CONTE NTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CA SE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE A ND NO DISCUSSION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE MERIT OF THE CASE. IT IS ALSO NOTICED T HAT THE LD. CIT(A) MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE AS SESSEE THROUGH POST WHICH WERE RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY STATING THE A DDRESS TO BE INCOMPLETE WHICH SHOWS THAT NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT NO EFFORT WAS MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT T O SERVE THE NOTICE FOR HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BY OTHER PERMISSIBLE MODE, IF IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE THROUGH POST. 6. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMN ED, UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM, AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . WE THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE TH IS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. 3 CIT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE AS SESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 16/06/2020 ) SD/- SD/- '# $ .., (SANJAY GARG ) ( N.K. SAI NI) % &'/ JUDICIAL MEMBER / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 16/06/2020 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE