M/s. Saraf Seasoning Udhyog, SARDARSHAHAR V. ITO, CHURU

ITA 155/JODH/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 54364 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

1 ITA 155-09 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH JODHPUR. ( BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA AND SHRI N.L. KALRA ) ITA NO. 155/JODH/2009 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06. M/S. SARAF SEASONING UDYOG, VS. THE INCOME-TAX O FFICER, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, WARD-2, SARDARSAHR. CHURU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURESH OJHA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MAHESH KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 02.12.2011. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.12.2011. ORDER DATED : 09/12/2011. PER R.K. GUPTA, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION FOR ADMITTING CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES I.E. AFFIDAVIT OF THE PARTNER, SALES-TAX ASSESSMENT ORDERS AND CERTIFICATES FROM OVERSEAS PARTIES TO WHOM THE HAND ICRAFT ITEMS WERE SENT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THESE EVIDENCES GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE CASE AND IF THESE EVIDENCES ARE CONSIDERED THEN DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10BA IS FOU ND TO BE ALLOWABLE. 2 3. THE LD. D/R ON THE OTHER HAND, STATED THAT IF TH ESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ARE ADMITTED, THEN MATTER SHOULD BE SENT BACK TO THE FI LE OF ASSESSING OFFICER AS THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE NOT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT (A). 4. IN REPLY, THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT MATTER CAN BE SENT BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF JAIPUR BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF M/S. MANGALAM ART. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED HERE BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE CASE. HOWEVER, THEY WERE NOT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR BEFORE LD. CIT (A). THEREFORE, OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO BE ALLO WED AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER AND R EMAND BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCES AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE DECISION IN CASE OF M/S. MANGALAM ART, ON WHICH REL IANCE HAS BEEN PLACED BY LD. A/R, SHALL PASS A FRESH ORDER AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09. 12.2011. SD/- SD/- ( N.L. KALRA ) ( R.K. GUPTA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JODHPUR, 3 COPY FORWARDED TO :- M/S. SARAF SEASONING UDYOG, SARDARSHAHAR. THE ITO WARD-2, CHURU. THE CIT (A) THE CIT THE D/R GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 155/JODH/2009) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JODHPUR.