Sushila Laxman Bundale, Aurangabad V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 2 (5), Aurangabad

ITA 1786/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1164 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARISES OUT OF PASSED
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 201; 12; 144; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT . / ITA NO. 1 786 /PUN/201 9 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 - 12 MR S . SUSHILA LAXMAN BUNDALE , D137 - 3D, SECTOR, TV CENTRE, SW AMI VIVEKANAND NAGAR, HUDCO, AURANGABAD. PAN : A XAPB7010L VS. ITO, WARD - 2 ( 5 ), AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - 2 , AURANGABAD ON 07 - 0 8 - 201 9 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11 - 12 . 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN UPHOL DING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IN ADDITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED THE PASSING OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 COUPLED WITH THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOT GRANTING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. APPELLANT BY SHRI HARI KRISHAN RESPONDENT BY SHRI S.P. WALIMBE DATE OF HEARING 01 - 0 6 - 20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01 - 0 6 - 2 0 20 ITA NO . 1 786 /P UN/201 9 MRS. SUSHILA LAXMAN BUNDALE 2 3 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. AR REITERATED THE GROUNDS OF NOT GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, FIRSTLY , BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEN , THE LD. FIRST APPELLA TE AUTHORITY IN DECIDING THE ISSUE TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE CASE, WHICH COULD NOT BE FILED FOR NON - GRANTING OF PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. IT WAS THUS PRAYED THAT THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE TO PROVE HIS CASE BEFORE THE AO. THE LD. DR DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO THE SAME. 4. WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF ADDITION, I SET - ASIDE THE ORDER AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO FOR PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE ANY FRESH EVIDENCE AS HE DESIRES EXPEDIENT IN THE PROCESS OF FINALISATION OF THE ASSESSMENT. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST JUNE , 20 20 . SD/ - ( R.S.SYAL ) / VICE PRESIDENT PUNE ; DATED : 1 ST JUNE , 20 20 GCVSR ITA NO . 1 786 /P UN/201 9 MRS. SUSHILA LAXMAN BUNDALE 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEAL S) - 2 , AURANGABAD 4. THE PR. CIT - 2 , AURANGABAD 5. , , SMC / DR SMC , ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 0 1 - 0 6 - 20 20 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 01 - 0 6 - 20 20 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACE D BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8 . FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9 . DATE ON W HICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10 . DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 1 1 . DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *