The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(3), Bangalore V. M/s. Srishti Software Application Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 1615/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1401 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: H P BHARGAVA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 6; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1615/BANG/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1)(3), BENGALURU. VS. M/S SRISHTI SOFTWARE APPLICATION PVT. LTD., NO.L-174, 6 TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102. PAN AAJCS 0898 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : MS. NEERA MALHOTRA, CIT (DR) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI H.P BHARGAVA, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 05.12.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : .12.2019 O R D E R PER B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/3/2017 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-6, BENGALURU AN D IT RELATES TO THE ASST. YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE GROUNDS URGED BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IS OPPOSED TO LA W AND THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS GIVEN REASONABLE ITA NO.1615 /BANG/2017 PAGE 2 OF 5 OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE CIT(A) ERRED IN DECIDING THE MATTER BASED ON THE FR ESH EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE SUC H EVIDENCES WHICH IS CONTRAVENED TO THE PROVISION OF RULE 46A(3). 4. FOR THESE AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URG ED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER B E RESTORED. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. THE LD DR SUBMITTED THAT THE AO WAS CONSTRAINED TO COMPLETE THE ASST. TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGMENT U/S 144 OF TH E ACT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EXTEND COOPERATION TO THE AO. HOW EVER BEFORE LD CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND THE LD CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONFRONT ING THOSE DOCUMENTS WITH THE AO AND THE SAME HAS RESULTED IN VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE ITAT RULES. ACCORDIN GLY THE LD DR SUBMITTED THAT THE RELIEF GRANTED BY LD CIT(A) SHOU LD NOT BE SUSTAINED. ITA NO.1615 /BANG/2017 PAGE 3 OF 5 4. ON THE CONTRARY THE LD AR PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDER DATED 4/9/2019 PASSED IN ITA NO.1217/BANG/2017 IN T HE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASST. YEAR 2010-11 AND SUBM ITTED THAT THE ISSUES ARE COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CIT ED ABOVE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE MAIN PLEA OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED FRESH EVIDENCES WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO TH E AO AND THE SAME HAS RESULTED IN VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF RUL E 46A OF IT RULES. BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE ABO VE FACTUAL ASPECTS PRESENTED BY LD DR. 6. SINCE THERE IS VIOLATION OF PROVISION OF RULE 4 6A OF THE IT RULES, WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTIONS OF LD DR T HAT THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE LD CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. AT THE SAME TIME WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT, IN THE INTER EST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, ALL THE ISSUES, IN WHICH HE HAS GRANTED RE LIEF, SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTIO N TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO IN RESPECT OF ADDITIONAL EVID ENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASI DE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF RELIEFS GRANT ED BY HIM AND RESTORE THEM TO HIS FILE FOR EXAMINING IT AFRESH BY DULY GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO IN RESPECT OF ADDITIONAL EVID ENCES FURNISHED BY ASSESSEE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPORT OF THE A O AND EXPLANATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD CIT(A) MAY TAK E APPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ITA NO.1615 /BANG/2017 PAGE 4 OF 5 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON DECEMBER, 2019. SD/ - (BEENA PILLAI) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (B.R BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, DECEMBER, 2019. / VMS / COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE. ITA NO.1615 /BANG/2017 PAGE 5 OF 5 1. DATE OF DICTATION 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO SR.P.S .. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE.. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO .. 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DICTATION NOTE ENCLOSED DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 11. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 12. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER . 13. DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER. .. 14. DICTATION NOTE ENCLOSED