Tarsem Lal Sharma, Kangra V. ITO, Nurpur

ITA 205/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5425 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: HARRY RICKY
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.205 /CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04) TARSEM LAL SHARMA, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VILL.TIKKAR, P.O.PANJARA, NURPUR. DISTT. KANGRA. PAN: ANRPS1653B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI HARRY RICKY RESPONDENT BY : SMT.JAISHREE SHARMA, DR O R D E R THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), DATED 19.11.2010 RELATING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL : 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IS DEFECTIVE BOTH IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT NO PROPER AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT TO REPRESENT HIS CASE. 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), SIMLA IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.90,800/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER BY TREATING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE SAID ADDITION IS UNCALLED FOR AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED AS IT HAS BEEN MADE MERELY ON SURMISES AND CONJECTURES WITHOUT ANY STRONG BASIS. 2 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE HAD FILED AN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADJOURNED DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) HAS FAI LED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT ADJUDICATING CONFIRMED THE SAME. 4. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D FURNISHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE C IT(A). 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE C IT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OR HIS COUNSEL ON TH E RELEVANT DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE O N MERITS OF THE ADDITION AND SUMMARILY CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT THE CIT(A) IS TO PASS THE ORDER IN WRITING STATING THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE SAID DECISION. THE SAID PROPOSITIONS OF LAW ARE BOUND TO BE FOLLOW ED BY THE CIT(A) EVEN WHEN THE ORDER IS MADE EX-PARTE THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW THEREOF I SET ASIDE THE PRESENT ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND RE STORE THE SAME TO HIS FILE TO DECIDE DENOVO THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE. A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASS ESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE VIGILANT AND APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF 3 HEARING. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSES SEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DAY OF MAY, 2011. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30 TH MAY, 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH