DR. SOUMITRA KUMAR, Kolkata V. I.T.O, Wd -55(3), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2149/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99662 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-07-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R P NAG
• Assessee Lawyers: K M ROY
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Depreciation; Non compliance
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH SMC KOLKATA [BEFORE HON BLE S HRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM ] ITA NO .2149 /KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 ( A PPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) DR.SOUMITRA KUMAR - VERSUS - I.T.O., WARD - 55(3) , KOLKATA KOLKATA (PAN: AFAPK 1175 P) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI K.M.ROY, FCA FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI R.P.NAG, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 15 .07.2015 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.08.2015. ORDER THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF CIT(A ) - XXXVI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO . 275/CIT(A) - XXXVI/KOL/37/ITO,WD - 55(3)/KOL/08 - 09/200 DATED 23.04.2013 . ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY I.T.O., WARD - 55(3), KOLKATA U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS THE ACT ) FOR A.YR . 2006 - 07 VIDE IT S ORDER DATED 29.12.2008. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. THAT THE ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS FOR RS.191735/ - CONSIDERED BY LOWER AUTHORITIES IS PERVERSE SINCE THERE ARE NO COGENT EVIDENCES OF SUPPRESSION. 2. THAT ADVANCE RECEIPT OF PROFESSIONAL FEES OF RS.72647/ - HAS BEEN ERRONEOUSLY BROUGHT TO TAX AS NO SERVICE HAS BEEN RENDERED AND HENCE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE TAXABLE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR. 3. THAT LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE SERIOUSLY ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING HIGH ER DEPRECIATION OF RS.24089 ON LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENTS. 4. THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.50945/ - TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IS PERVERSE SINCE VALUE OF SUCH ASSETS, BROUGHT FORWARD FROM EARLIER YEAR HAS BEEN WRITTEN OFF DUE TO OBSOLESCENCE AND THERE HAS BEEN N O FRESH INVESTMENT IN THE YEAR. 3. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED BY AO AS WELL AS ORDER OF CIT(A). ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE CIT(A) S OBSERVATIONS ARE AS UNDER : - ITA NO. 2149/KOL.2013 DR.SOUMITRA KUMAR . A.YR. 2006 - 07 2 3. ON RECEIPT OF THE LETTER UNDER REFERENCE CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT, THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN HIS CLAIM AS PER COPY OF HIS LETTER DATED 01.12.2008, SUBMITTED BEFORE YOUR HONOUR FOR WHICH THE REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN CALLED FOR. IN COMPLIANCE TO THIS OFFICE LETTER DATED 24.6.2011 SE RVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 27.6.2011, SRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, FCA AND THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED ON 4.7.2011 AND HE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE NECESSARY DETAILS AS PER ORDER SHEET DATED 4.7.2011 (COPY ENCLOSED) AND EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM AS PER HIS L ETTER DATED 01.12.2008. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 18.7.2011 BUT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE ON THE DATE. SUBSEQUENTLY A FURTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THIS OFFICE LETTER DATED 21.7.2011 REAFFIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 29.7.2011 AND TH IS TIME ALSO NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED NOW ASSESSEE PREFERRED SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. HOWEVER ON NON COMPLIANCE O N THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE CIT(A) PASSED ORDER BY DISPOSING OFF GROUND NOS.1 TO 4 WITHOUT GIVING PROPER REASONING AS WELL AS BASIS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF AO. AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT THAT THE APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRS T APPELLATE AUTHORITY SHOULD BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. THE PROVISION OF THE SAID SECTION 250(6) ARE IN THE NATURE OF INSTRUCTIONS TO THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND EMPHAS IZING THAT THE ORDER DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE A SPEAKING ORDER. ORDER SHALL NOT BE CRYPTIC AND IT SHALL BE SELF EXPLANATORY. THAT SUB - SECTION CANNOT SUPPORT THE ARGUMENT THAT THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY SHALL NOT TRAVEL BEYOND THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL. THUS SECTION 250(6) PROVIDES THAT ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING. SUCH ORDERS ARE TO STATE THE ISSUES ARISING IN THE APPEAL, THE DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY THEREON AND THE REASON FOR SUCH DECISION . THUS MORE SO BECAUSE SUCH ORDERS ARE SUBJECT TO FURTHER APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL. 4.1 IT IS NOTICED THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE HIM BY THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED A CRYPTIC ORDER WITHOUT DISCUSS ING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. ON QUERY FROM THE BENCH, THE LD. SR DR CONCEDED THAT LET THE ISSUE BE REMITTED TO CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. IN TERMS OF THE ABOVE I REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) AND ITA NO. 2149/KOL.2013 DR.SOUMITRA KUMAR . A.YR. 2006 - 07 3 DIRE CT HIM TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE HIM. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5 . IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN TH E COURT . SD/ - [MAH AVIR SINGH] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 03.08.2015. R.G.(.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1 . DR.SOUMITRA KUMAR, FLAT NO.52 - B, 58/1, B.C.ROAD, KOLKATA - 700019. 2 I.T.O., WARD - 55(3), KOLKATA. 3 . THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A) - XXXVI , KOLKATA. 5 . DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA TRUE COPY , BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES