Shri Naved Khan, Bhopal V. THE ITO 1(1), Bhopal

ITA 1540/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5684 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1); 148

Judgement Text

NAVED KHAN - ITA NO. 1540/IND/2016 A.Y.2006-07 PAGE 1 OF 4 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE .. , . . , !'!# BEFORE SHRI C. M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . . $ /. I.T.A. NO.1540/IND/2016 %& / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 SHRI NAVED KHAN BHOPAL VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1) BHOPAL / // / APPELLANT / // / RESPONDENT . . ./ PAN: BHQPK 2308P / // / APPELLANT BY NONE / // / RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED / // / DATE OF HEARING 21.03.2017 / // / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 27.03.2017 (27.3.17) / // / O R D E R PER BENCH THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),BHOPAL, [HEREI NAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT (A)] DATED 17.12.2013. THIS APPEAL PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AS AGAINST APPEAL DECIDED IN RESPECT OF ASS ESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.12.2013 PASSED U/S. 144/147 OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT) BY THE ITO 1(1) BHOP AL [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO]. NAVED KHAN - ITA NO. 1540/IND/2016 A.Y.2006-07 PAGE 2 OF 4 2 1. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING INSPITE OF NOTICE. THE LEARNED DR WAS HEARD. 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL I S THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TREATING CREDIT CARD PAYMENT AMOUNTING TO RS.2,0 8,529/- AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 2.1 SUCCINCTLY, FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED INFORMATION REGARDING PAYMENT AGAINST BILLS RAISED IN RESPECT OF A CREDIT CARD EX CEEDING RS. 2 LACS BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, ISSUED A QUERY LETTER DATED 9.11.2012 TO THE ASSESSEE REQUIRING DETAILS OF FILI NG OF INCOME TAX RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 BUT THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT FURNISH ANY REPLY THERETO. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SUED NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE THERETO. AGAIN, A NOTICE U/S 142(1) ALONG WITH QUES TIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED BUT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY RETURN OF INCOME OF INCOME WAS FILED. A REMINDER LETTER WAS ALSO ISSUED BUT TO NO AVAIL. FINALLY, A NOTICE U/S 144(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED P ROPOSED ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD BUT IT RECEIVED THE SAME FATE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. NAVED KHAN - ITA NO. 1540/IND/2016 A.Y.2006-07 PAGE 3 OF 4 3 2.2 AS PER THE INFORMATION, A PAYMENT OF RS.2,08,52 9/- FOR BILLS RAISED IN RESPECT OF A CREDIT CARD OF ICICI BANK HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE SAM E. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY REPLY TO THE QUERY RAISED . THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION REGARDING THE SOURCE OF PAYMENT OF CREDIT CARD AMOU NTING TO RS.2,08,529/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, TR EADED THE SAME PAYMENT AS UNEXPLAINED AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TO TAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL THAT BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT REMAIN PRESENT. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2.3 NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 2.4 THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW. 2.5 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED D R IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IN OUR OPINION, IT WOULD BE JUST AND PROPER TO AFFORD ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPL AIN HIS CASE. IT IS A WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THAT NO-B ODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD. PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL REQUIRES TH AT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE DECIDING THE ISSUE AGAINST HIM. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE NAVED KHAN - ITA NO. 1540/IND/2016 A.Y.2006-07 PAGE 4 OF 4 4 ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAVE DECID ED THE MATTER WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEES IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE S OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, THIS APPEAL NEEDS TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFTER PROVIDING DUE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING TH E PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO FRAME FRESH ASSESSMENT AFTER PROVIDING THE ASSESSEES DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. NEEDLESS TO MENTION THA T THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE EVIDENCE, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH MARCH, 2017. SD SD/- (.. ) (C.M.GARG) JUDICIAL MEMBER (..) (O.P.MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MARCH 27 , 2017 DN/-