Shri Bhavneet Singh, V. DCIT,

ITA 143/RAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0346 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K PODDAR; M K CHOUDHARY RESPONDE
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 144; 2

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: CIRCUIT BENCH : RANCHI [BEFORE HONBLE S/SHRI N. S. SAINI, AM AND GEORGE M ATHAN, JM] ITA NO. 143,144 AND 145/RAN/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2009-10 SHRI BHAVNEET SINGH, PROP. POPULAR CARRIER, BYE PASS ROAD, CHAS, BOKARO 827013 PAN NO. ARMPS 1960N VS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-III, BOKARO (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY S/SHRI S. K. PODDAR AND M. K. CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI AVIJIT RAKSHIT, DR DATE OF HEARING: 26-10-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26-10-2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM: ITA NO.143/RAN/2014 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), JAMSHEDPUR IN APPEAL N O.297/JSR/2010-11 DATED 24-02-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 CO NFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1) (C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO.144/RAN/2014 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE LEARNED CIT(A),JAMSHEDPUR IN APPEAL NO.110/JSR/2010-11 DATE D 24-02-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION O F PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.145/RAN/2014 IS AN AP PEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), J AMSHEDPUR IN APPEAL NO.543/JSR/2011-12 DATED 31-01-2014 CONFIRMING ADDI TIONS MADE BY THE AO WHEN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.143, 144 AND 145/RAN/2014 (AYS 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2009-10) 2 2. SHRI S. K. PODDAR ALONG WITH SHRI M. K. CHOUDHUR Y, ADVOCATES REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI AVIJ IT RAKSHIT, LEARNED DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DOING THE BUSI NESS OF TRADING, MACHINE HIRE AND OTHER WORKS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/ S. PODDAR CARRIERS AND M/S. D. S. ENTERPRISES. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS SALARY INCOME, INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT DURING THE YEAR 2010-11, THE ASSE SSEES FATHER WAS MURDERED AT BOKARO AND THE ASSESSEE HAD TO RUN AWAY FROM BOKARO. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO CO-OPERATE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH WERE IN THE PROCESS DURING THE PE RIOD BETWEEN 2010 AND 2013. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THERE WAS ALSO A T HEFT IN THE ASSESSEES PREMISES IN DECEMBER, 2013. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THA T AS THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO REPRESENT HIS MATTER PROPERLY BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY, EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER CAN BE PASSED AND THE PENALTY ALSO CAME BE LEVIED. IT WAS ALSO THE SUBMISSION THAT ALL EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS RETURNS FILED WERE AVAILABLE AND IT WAS ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT STAY AT BOKARO ON ACCOUNT OF THR EAT TO HIS LIFE AND LIMB, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED IN THE ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT BOTH THE PENALTIES AND THE EX-PARTE ASS ESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2009-10 RESPE CTIVELY MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. IT WAS A SPECIFIC UNDERTAKING BY THE LEARNED AR THAT THE ASSESSEE WOU LD CO-OPERATE IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIO US OBJECTION TO THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED AR AND HIS STATEMENT MAD E IN THE BAR. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO REPRESENT HIS TAX AFFAIRS EF FECTIVELY BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ITA NO.143, 144 AND 145/RAN/2014 (AYS 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2009-10) 3 ASSESSEE MUST BE GRANTED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO SU BSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS. CONSEQUENTLY, THE PENALTY ORDERS PASSED U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 AS ALSO THE AS SESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 144 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 009-10 STAND SET-ASIDE AND THE ISSUES STAND RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBST ANTIATE HIS CASE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE CLOSE OF HEARING ON 26-10-2015. SD/- SD/- ( N .S. SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 26.10.15 LK DEKA/SR.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - 5. THE DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ITA NO.143, 144 AND 145/RAN/2014 (AYS 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2009-10) 4 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 26.10.2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 26.10.2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 26.10.2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 26.10.2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 26,.10.2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26.10.2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 26.10.2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER