Smt.Rutika , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(2)(4), Bangalore

ITA 1743/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7688 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR SHANKAR PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL D SURANA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH A SMC BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1743/BANG/2018 (ASST. YEAR 2014-15) SMT. RUTIKA, NO.263, FLAT NO.107, 1 ST FLOOR, MANIDHARI ENCLAVE, 1 ST MAIN ROAD, CHAMRAJPET, BENGALURU. . APPELLANT PAN BSNP56852A. VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(4), BANGALORE. . RESPONDENT ITA NO.1744/BANG/2018 (ASST. YEAR 2014-15) SMT. PREMLATA M KOTHARI, NO.103, 2 ND FLOOR, JUMMA MASJID ROAD, BENGALURU. . APPELLANT PAN AFYPK0474M. VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(2), BANGALORE. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL D SURANA, C.A RESPONDENT BY : DR. SHANKAR PRASAD, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 11-7-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-7-2018 O R D E R PER SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : ITA NOS.1743 & 17 44/B/18 2 THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS). ALMOS T ALL GROUNDS ARE COMMON EXCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN QUANTUM. SINCE THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, THEY ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONS OLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. HOWEVER, I PREFER TO EXTRACT THE GROU NDS RAISED IN APPEAL NO.1744/BANG/2018 AS UNDER :- 1. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), BENGALURU - 5 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER IN THE MANNER PASSED BY HIM. THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING BAD IN LAW IS REQUIRED TO BE QUASHED. 2. IN ANY CASE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE ORDER HA VING BEEN PASSED IN TOTAL DISREGARD OF AND IN VIOLATION OF TH E PRINCIPLES OR NATURAL JUSTICE, MAKES THE ORDER BAD IN LAW AND LIA BLE TO BE QUASHED. 3. I IN ANY CASE AND WITHOUT FURTHER PREJUDICE, TH E LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), BENGALURU - 5 HAS ERRED IN; A) CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 8,33,435/- BEING SA LE CONSIDERATION ON SALE OF SHARES OF M/S TURBO TECH E NGINEERING LIMITED. B) HOLDING WITHOUT BASIS THAT THE TRANSACTIONS IN SHARES ARE FICTITIOUS. ON PROPER APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND THE LAW APPLICABLE, THE TRANSACTIONS ARE DULY R ECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE ADDITIONS AS DONE BEI NG TOTALLY ON ERRONEOUS PREMISE IS TO BE DELETED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), BENGALURU - 5 HAS ERR ED IN MAKING VARIOUS OBSERVATIONS AND COMING TO VARIOUS CONCLUSIONS WITHOUT PROOF AND EVIDENCE AND SUCH OBS ERVATION AND CONCLUSION NEED TO BE TOTALLY IGNORED. 5. THE APPELLANT DENIES THE LIABILITY TO PAY INTERE ST. THE INTEREST HAVING BEEN LEVIED ERRONEOUSLY IS TO BE DELETED. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS TO BE AD DUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE IMPUGNED O RDER BE ITA NOS.1743 & 17 44/B/18 3 QUASHED OR ATLEAST THE ADDITION MADE TO THE INCOME BE DELETED AND THE INTEREST LEVIED BE DELETED. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) W ITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FIXED THESE APPEALS FOR HEARING ONLY FOR ONE DAY I.E ON 6/3/2018 AND WHEN NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEES, CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES HAVING OBSER VED THAT THE ASSESSEES WERE NOT INTERESTED IN PERUSING THEIR APPEALS. THE REFORE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND MATTERS MAY BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE TO RE- ADJUDICATE THE APPEALS ON MERITS AFTER AFFORDING PR OPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. 3. THE LD DR PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDE RS OF THE CIT(A) 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF TH E CIT(A), I FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS UNDISPUTEDLY FIXED THESE APPEALS FOR HEA RING ONLY FOR ONE DAY I.E ON 6/3/2018. I DO NOT FIND ANY SPECIFIC FINDIN G OF THE CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO THE SERVICE OF NOTICES UPON THE ASSESSEES . THE CIT(A) INSTEAD OF FIXING THE HEARING ON SOME OTHER DATE, HAS DECIDED THE APPEALS AGAINST THE ASSESSEES EX-PARTE. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW T HAT THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEES TO PROSECUTE THEIR C ASES. ACCORDINGLY, I SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) TO RESTORE THE MATTE RS TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEALS ON MERITS BY PASSING THE REASONED ORDERS ON ALL ISSUES RAISED BEFORE HIM AFTER AFFOR DING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NOS.1743 & 17 44/B/18 4 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JULY, 2018 . SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE DATED : 13/7/2018 VMS COPY TO :1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRET ARY, ITAT, BANGALORE ITA NOS.1743 & 17 44/B/18 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. 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 RE GISTRAR 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. ..