Sri Sumermal k Jain , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(5), Bangalore

ITA 1511/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7154 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PALANI KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC-C, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO.1511 (BANG) 2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 11) SHRI SUMERMAL K JAIN, PROP.: HITENDRA SALES CORPORATION, NO. 109, MAMULPET, APPELLANT BENGALURU - 560053 PAN. ABQPJ5002Q VS THE ITO, WARD 1 (3),NOW 2 (2) (5) BENGALURU RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SMT. SUMAN LUNKAR, C. A. REVENUE BY : SHRI PALANI KUMAR, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 22-11-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 4-11-2017 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS DIRE CTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) 2, BANGALORE DATED 13.04.2017 FOR A. Y . 2010 11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 8 GROUNDS BUT EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE ON MERIT IS ONLY ONE ABOUT ADDITION OF RS. 11,63,86 8/- ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF MR. MUKESH CHOKSI AND THE NEXT GRIEVAN CE IS ABOUT INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234A TO 234C. 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A COPY OF T HE TRIBUNAL ORDER RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SHRI MUKESH KUMAR SOLANKI V S. ITO IN ITA NO. 2168/BANG/2016 DATED 17.03.2017 AND POINTED OUT THA T IN THAT CASE ALSO, SIMILAR ADDITION WAS MADE BASED ON THE SAME STATEME NT OF MR. MUKESH CHOKSI AND THE TRIBUNAL RESTORED BACK THE MATTER TO AO FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE KARNATAKA H IGH COURT RENDERED IN THE ITA NO. 1511(BANG)2017 2 CASE OF CHANDRA DEVI KOTHARI IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3 9390/2014 DATED 02.02.2015 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE DETAILS/COP Y OF THE STATEMENT BASED ON WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND MATTER BE THEN DECIDED AFRESH AFTER PR OVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I RESPE CTFULLY FOLLOW THE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND THE CITED JUDGMENT OF HONBLE KA RNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA DEVI KOTHARI (SUPRA ) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO AO FOR FRESH DECISION WITH THE SAME DIRECTI ONS AS WERE GIVEN BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THAT CASE AS PER PA RA 8 OF THAT JUDGMENT. HENCE, NO FURTHER ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR AT THE PRESENT STAGE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE D A T E D : 24.11.2017 /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APP ELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.