Atul Kumar, Lucknow V. Income Tax Officer, Lucknow

ITA 220/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1130 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT AWASTHI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH MISHRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 220/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 ATUL KUMAR D - 51, RAJA JI PURAM LUCKNOW V. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 4(1) LUCKNOW PAN: ADLPA 3701A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI BHARAT AWASTHI, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 15 02 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16 02 2018 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. BECAUSE THE LEARNED 'CIT (APPEAL)' FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FULL FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHILE C OMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT ON RS. 16,22,216 / - AGA INST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 1 ,58,486 - . 2. BECAUSE THE LEARNED 'CIT (APPEAL)' ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.1 4,63I730/ - O N ACCOUNT OF ADDITION OF BUSINESS TRAN SACTION THROUGH S AVING BANK ACCOUNT BECAUSE THE APPLICANT FIRM CURRENT BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN SUSPE NDE D DUE TO REASON FOR ACCOUNT IS NPA. 3. BECAUSE NO PROPER REASONS HAS BEEN FORWARDED BOTH BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND BY THE LD CIT (APPEAL) IIND LUCKNOW. IN MAKING AND CONFIRMING AND HAS RELIED ON WRONG FACTS AND BASED ON MORE PRESUMPTION. ITA NO.220/LKW/2017 : - 2 - : 4. BECAUSE THE ORDER OF THE 'LEARNED CTT (APPEALS) ILND LUCKNOW, IS WITHOUT ANY MERITS AND IS SIMPLE BASED ON MERE HYPOTHESIS, CONJUNCTURE & SURMISES AND NEEDS TO BE CANCELLED AND THE INCOME AS RETURNED BY THE APPELLANT BE ACCEPTED. 5. BECAUSE THE ORDER O F THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) IS ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, MISCONCEIVED, ERRONEOUS AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED MY ATTENTION TO THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACT THAT CERTAIN DEPOSITS ARE MADE OUT OF TRADE RECEIPTS . T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE NOT PROPERLY EXAMINED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WHILE MAKI NG THE ADDITIONS. THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN THE LIGHT OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE A SSESSEE. 3 . THE LD. D.R. PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, I FIND THAT THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON THE BASIS OF CERTAIN CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BA NK ACCOUNT. WHILE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES , THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED NOR EXA MINED WHETHER THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT DISCLOSED SOURCE OR NOT. IN THE LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE S REQUIRE RE - ADJUDICATION BY THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY , I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.220/LKW/2017 : - 3 - : 5 . IN THE RES ULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION ED PAGE. SD/ - [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16 TH FEBRUARY , 201 8 JJ: 1502 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR