G.Venkatram Reddy, Chittoor, Secunderabad V. ITO, Ward-2, Chittoor, Chittoor

ITA 145/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6324 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E SUNIL BABU
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

ITA NO 145 OF 2016 G VENKATARAM REDDY CHITTOOR PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 145/HYD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) SRI G. VENKATARAM REDDY, CHITTOOR PAN: ALZPR 8751 P VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 CHITTOOR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI PAWAN KUMAR CHAKRAPANI FOR REVENUE : SHRI K.E. SUNIL BABU, DR DATE OF HEA R ING : 4.8.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 .8.2016 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2009-10. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF TH E CIT (A) ENHANCING THE ASSESES INCOME WITHOUT GIVING ANY OP PORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GR OUND NO.4 TO THIS EFFECT AND OTHER GROUNDS ARE AGAINST THE MERIT S OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE CIT (A). 2. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY MENTION OF ANY NOTICE BEING GIVEN TO THE ASSESS EE BEFORE ENHANCEMENT OF ASSESSEES INCOME. WE FIND THAT IN P ARA 4.1 OF HIS ORDER, THE CIT (A) HAS MENTIONED THAT IT WAS PO INTED OUT TO THE ASSESSEE THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE ORDERS OF THE IT AT HYDERABAD, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO ENHANCE THE ASSESSEES IN COME, BUT THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASS ESSEE FOR SUCH ENHANCEMENT OR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPLIED TO SUC H A NOTICE. THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW IS THAT THE CIT (A) SHOULD G IVE A SHOW ITA NO 145 OF 2016 G VENKATARAM REDDY CHITTOOR PAGE 2 OF 2 CAUSE NOTICE, IN WRITING, POINTING OUT THE REASONS FOR ENHANCEMENT OF THE INCOME AND THE ASSESSEE IS AT LI BERTY TO FILE ITS OBJECTIONS TO SUCH ENHANCEMENT AND IT IS ONLY A FTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES OBJECTIONS IN TOTO, CAN THE CIT (A) ENHANCE THE INCOME BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. IN THE CASE BEFORE US, THE CIT (A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY NOTICE FOR ENHANCEMENT OF ASSESSEES INCOME. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE CANNO T BE EXPECTED TO ASSUME THE REASONS FOR ENHANCEMENT SOUGHT TO BE MADE BY THE CIT (A). THIS ENHANCEMENT IS IN VIOLATION OF PR INCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND HENCE NOT SUSTAINABLE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) WITH A DIRECTION TO THE CIT (A) TO ISSUE A SHOW CAUSE NO TICE TO THE ASSESSEE, IN WRITING FOR EHNANCEMENT OF INCOME AND THEREAFTER, AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF HEA RING, TO DECIDE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 3. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH AUGUST, 2016. S D/ - S D/ - (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 12 TH AUGUST, 2016. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. SHRI V.M. CHAKRAPANI & CO. CAS, NO.5-5-8/9 & 10, 2 ND FLOOR, SRINIVASA BUILDING, RANIGUNJ, SECUNDERABAD 500003 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 CHITTOOR 3. CIT(A) - TIRUPATI 4. PR. CIT TIRUPATI 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER