Ratan Chandra Jana, Paschim Medinipur V. C.I.T (A) - XXXVI,kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1627/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 162723514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SR DR
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH: KOLKATA [BEFORE HON BLE SHRI B.P.JAIN, AM] I.T.A NO.1627 /KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 SRI RATAN CHANDRA JANA , VS. C.I.T.(A) - XXXVI, PROP.M/S.LALBABA BRICKS,KOLKATA KOLKATA (APPELLA NT) ( RESPONDENT) (PAN: ACRPJ 7395 L) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI SANJAY, SR.DR, ADDL. C.I.T. DATE OF HEARING : 04 .06 .2015. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04 .06 .2015. ORDER PER SHRI B.P.JAIN, AM : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) - XXXVI, KOLKATA DATED 02.02 .2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. THAT THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST EX - PARTE DISMISSED OF APPEAL. 2. THAT ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANTS APPEAL FOR ALLEGED NON - PURSING OF THE APPEAL AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBJECT ISSUE ON MERIT. 3. THAT THIS CASE IS IDENTICAL WITH THE CASE ITA NO.768/KOL/2012 A.Y. 200 7 - 08 IN DYNAMIC PROCESS (PVT.) THAT VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX AND DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE AS PER ABOVE CASE OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE BALANCE SHEET AS AT 31.03 .2006 THAT THE VALUE OF LAND & BUILDING AS ON 31.03.2006 WAS R S.19,13,326/ - . BUT THE BROUGHT FORWARDED BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2006 OF LAND & BUILDING WAS SHOWN AS RS.11,68,071/ - IN THE BALANCE SHE ET AS AT 31.03.2007. SO, THERE WA S DISCREPANCY OF RS.7,45,255/ - IN VALUE OF LAND & BUILDING. THE ASSESSE WAS ASKED TO RECONCILE THE DISCREPANCY, B UT HE FAILED TO RECONCILE THE DISCREPANCY. THUS HE WAS ASKED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY RS.7,45,255/ - SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND CONCEALMENT O F HIS INCOME. IN REPLY, HE COULD NOT OFFER ANY SATISFACTORY ITA NO 1627/KOL/2013 SHRI RATAN C HANDRA JANA, PROP M/S.LALBABA BRICKS A.YR. 2007 - 08 2 EXP LANATION. HENCE, RS.7,45,255/ - WA S TREATED AS CONCEALED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY APPLYING THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S.MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.)LTD.[1991] 38 ITD 320, DELHI BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL IN SPITE OF GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS , THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF KOLKATA BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF DYNAMIC PROCESS (PVT.) VS ACIT WHEREIN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES THE MATTER WAS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE O F LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH AND TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER. THE SAID ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW : - INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA I.T.A. NO.768/KOL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08 DYNAMIC PROCESS PVT. LTD. VS. ASSISTANT COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.09.2012 ORDER PER BENCH : THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF CIT(A) - XXXVI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 9 85/CIT(A) - XXXVI/KOL/ACIT CIR - 1/HGLY/09 - 10 DATED 09.02.2012. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ACIT, CIR CLE - 1, HOOGHLY, U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) FOR AY 2007 - 08 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 31.12.2009. 2. AT THE OUT SET IT IS NOTICED THAT THE FIRST ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DI SMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINI WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBJECT ISSUES ON MERIT. FOR THIS, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND NO. 1: 1. AGAINST EX PARTE DISMISSAL OF APPEAL: A) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. C IT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT S APPEAL FOR ALLEGED NON - PURSUING OF THE APPEAL. B) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT S APPEAL IN LIMINE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF THE SUB JECT ISSUES ON MERIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS EX PARTE AND EVEN NON - SPEAKING ORDER, WHICH IS AS UNDER: NOBODY ATTENDED IN RESPONSE TO FIXATION OF HEARING S ON 14.10.11, 25.01.12 & 09.02.2012. IT APPEARS THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND FILING THE SUBMISSIONS IN SPITE OF GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES OUT A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF (1991) 38 ITD 320 DELHI, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT IS DISMISSED. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF CIT(A), WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS PASSED A NON - SPEAKING O RDER BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLA N INDIA (PVT.) LTD. (SUPRA). WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT WHERE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OF EVEN THOUGH ON MERITS WITHOUT A ITA NO 1627/KOL/2013 SHRI RATAN C HANDRA JANA, PROP M/S.LALBABA BRICKS A.YR. 2007 - 08 3 SPEAKING ORDER, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT ARE IN THE NATURE OF JUDICIAL DISCRE TION TO THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND EMPHASIZING THAT THE ORDER DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE A SPEAKING ORDER. THE ORDER SHALL NOT CRYPTIC BUT SHALL BE SELF EXPLANATORY. HENCE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE FOR FRES H A DJUDICATION AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5.1. IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES THE I SSUE IN THIS CASE ALSO IS IDENTICAL WHEREIN THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS APPLIED THE DECISION OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF M/S.MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT) LTD. (SUPRA) AND HAS PASSED A NON - SPEAKING ORDER WITHOUT DECIDING THE IS SUE ON MERIT. ACCORDINGLY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE I SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) BUT AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT DENOVO . THUS ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6 . IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDE R PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 .06 .2015. SD/ - [ B.P.JAIN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 04 .06 .2015. R.G.(.P.S.) C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . SHRI RATAN CHANDRA JANA, PROP.LALBABA BRICKS, VILL.RAUTARAPUR, P.O.KHALSENLI, JHARGRAM, PASCHIM MIDNAPORE. 2. C.I.T. (A) - XXXVI, KOLKATA. 3 . CIT KOLKATA. 5. CIT - DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA T RUE COPY, BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES