MOHAN LAL MEENA, Jaipur V. ITO, Dausa

ITA 218/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6220 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM RAI DCIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES , JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,O JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D L NL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 218/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 DR MOHAN LAL MEENA MOHAN SADAN, OPP. GOVT. P.G. COLLEGE AGRA ROAD, DAUSA CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- DAUSA DAUSA LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AAWPM 8351 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SMT. POONAM RAI, DCIT- DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 13/04/2018 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 /04/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 03-12-2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2011-12 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN SUSTAIING THE ADDITION OF RS. 30,90,248/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH INVESTMENT OF ASS ESSEE BY COMPLETELY IGNORING THE FACT THAT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCES WERE SU BMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSEOF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THUS THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE HELD IN LAW AND CONSEQUENT ADDITION MADE DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 1.1 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN NOT CO NSIDERING THE FACT THAT SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS FOUND IN THE BANK ACCO UNT OF ASSESSEE WAS DULY EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDING BY ITA NO. 218/JP/2016 DR MOHAN LAL MEENA VS ITO, WARD, DAUSA . 2 SUBMITTING CASH BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. TH US THE ADDITION OF RS. 30,90,248/- MADE BY AO DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 1.2 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN NOT CO NSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH INTRODUCED IN THE CASH BOOK OF ASSESSEE WAS DULY EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDING AND THE FACT OF HOLDING OF AGRICULTURAL LAND BY ASSESSEE AN D HIS WIFE WAS DULY ADMITTED BY AO AS WELL AS THE FACT OF CARRYING OF AGRICULTUR AL ACTIVITIES THEREON, HOWEVER, HAS ARBITRARILY HELD THAT NO EVIDENCES WAS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO DEBTORS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AND HAS A LLOWED ONLY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 5.00 LACS TOWARDS DEBTORS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODU CE . 2.1 AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCES WERE PRODUCED AS TO THE ISSUE IN QUESTION BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES BUT THEY WERE NOT TAKEN INTO CONS IDERATION FOR WHICH THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION ALONGWITH PAPER BOOK. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE IS DEPRIVED OF GETTING THE NATU RAL JUSTICE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIONS MAD E BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES SHOULD BE DELETED. 2.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE SUBMI SSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW . 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOT IMPERATIVE TO REPEAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THE RELEVANT POINT IS TH AT THE EVIDENCES WHICH THE ASSESSEE WANT TO PRODUCE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHO RITIES SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES BEFORE ADJUDI CATION OF THE CASE. ITA NO. 218/JP/2016 DR MOHAN LAL MEENA VS ITO, WARD, DAUSA . 3 FROM THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORDS, IT APPEARS THA T THE ASSESSEE IS DEPRIVED OF PRODUCING THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES AS TO THE ISSUE IN QUESTION. HENCE, IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE IT AFRESH TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH WRITTEN SUBMISSION. THE AO IS ALSO DIRECT ED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/04/2018. SD/- SD/- HKKXPUN DQY HKKJR (BHAGCHAND) (KUL BHARAT) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 13 /04/ 2018 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- DR MOHAN LAL MEENA, DAUSA 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD DAUSA 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 218/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR