Sri Ramireddy Raghunath , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(3), Bangalore

ITA 2201/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8212 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 142(1); 143(1); 250; 54; 144; 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2201 /BANG/201 8 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) RAMIREDDY RAGHUNATH, BY LEGAL HEIR SMT.USHA RAMIREDDY RAGHUNATH, A 302, ADARSH PALACE APARTMENT, 47 TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 5 TH BLOCK, BENGALURU-560041. PAN:AGEPR 4325 B VS. APPELLANT INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3), HUBLI. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.RAMESH, CA. RESPONDENT BY : DR. P.V.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADDL.CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING: 26/03/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03/04/2019 O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A), HUBLI, DATED 23/02/2018 PASSED U/S 144 R.W.S. 154 AND 250 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961 ['THE ACT' FOR S HORT]. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ITA NO.2201/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 6 1. THE CIT (A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN NOT APPRECIATING TH E FACTS THAT THE APPELLANT COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE A.O. IN VIEW OF HIS ILLNESS (CANCER). 2. THE CIT (A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN NOT DISPOSING THE AP PEAL ON MERITS THOUGH THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THE DETAI LS FOR THE ADDITIONS MADE BY A.O. AND EXPLAINED THE TRANSA CTIONS DONE IN BANK ACCOUNT. 3. THE CIT (A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN NOT ACCEPTING AND CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY APPELLANT FOR INVOKING PROVISIONS U/S. 246A IN RESPECT OF ULS.246 A IN RESPECT OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFORE HIM . 4. THE CIT (A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN NOT CALLING REMAND R EPORT FROM A.O. BASED ON THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE CIT ( A) AS A.O. HAS MADE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT U/S 144. 5. THE CIT (A) WAS NOT CORRECT IN NOT DISPOSING OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON MERITS IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE BY A.O QUANTIFY OF RS.50.08.300/-U/S.69A ON BEST JUDGMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 144. 6. BOTH CIT (A) AND A.O WERE NOT CORRECT IN DISPOSING OF THE PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY T O THE APPELLANT. 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD. TO ALTER. TO AME ND OR TO DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. WHEREFORE ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS AND ON SUCH OTHER GR OUNDS THE APPELLANT PRAYS THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO DELETE T HE ADDITIONS AS ABOVE AND MAY PASS SUCH OTHER AS THE APPELLATE AUTH ORITY DEEMS FIT 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 13/01/2013 WITH TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,69,570/- AND THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSE D U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS SENT ITA NO.2201/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 6 THROUGH POST BUT IT WAS RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH REMARKS LEFT NOT KNOWN. ON 30/9/2011 THE NOTICE WAS SERVED THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF INCOME-TAX BY WAY O F AFFIXTURE. THE INSPECTOR OF INCOME-TAX HAS FILED A REPORT ON 0 3/10/2011 THAT HE HAS SERVED THE NOTICE BY AFFIXTURE ON THE C OMPOUND WALL OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENCE OF TWO WITNESS ES. FURTHER NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 15 TH MAY 2012 AND WAS RETURNED BACK WITH SOME REASONS. FINALLY, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE DATED 15/01/2013 FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMEN T U/S 144 OF THE ACT BASED ON INFORMATION ON RECORD. SINCE T HE AO HAS NO OPTION TO COMPLETE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT PERUSED THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED INCOME U/S 44AF OF THE ACT. WHEREAS AS PER AIR INFORMATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.50,08,300/- IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT IN THE F INANCIAL YEAR 2009-10. SINCE NO EXPLANATION OR ANY DETAILS WERE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICES AND THE AO, HAVING GRANTED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES, MADE THE BEST JUD GMENT ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT WITH ADDITION U/S 69A OF RS.50,08,300/- AND ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.51,77,870/- AND PASSED THE ORDER U/S 144 OF THE ACT DATED 31/01/2013. ITA NO.2201/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 6 4. WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS RECTIFIED U/S 1 54 BY DISALLOWING THE CLAIM UNDER CHAPTER VIA OF THE ACT OF RS.30,000/- ON 23/12/2013. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL WIT H THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE AO HAS PROVID ED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITIES IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS. BUT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT COMPLY THE DIRECTIONS DUE TO ILL NESS AND THEREFORE AO WAS COMPELLED TO MAKE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE CORRECTNE SS OF THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED IN APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS COUL D NOT BE EXAMINED BY THE AO, THE CIT(A) IS OF THE OPINION TH AT IT IS NOT CORRECT TO ADMIT SUCH INFORMATION AND THEREFORE, CO NCURRED WITH THE ORDER OF THE AO AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES AP PEAL. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PPEAL WITH THE TRIBUNAL. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED AR FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, BANK STATEMENTS, MEDICAL CERTI FICATE AND DEATH CERTIFICATE OF LATE RAMIREDDY RAGHUNATH AND S UBMITTED THAT THE SAID INFORMATION COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY AND THE ASSESSEE CAN PROVE WITH SUPPORT T HE DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT AND PRAYED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY BE P ROVIDED FOR SUBMITTING INFORMATION AND CLARIFICATIONS BEFORE TH E ASSESSING AUTHORITY. ITA NO.2201/BANG/2018 PAGE 5 OF 6 CONTRA, LEARNED DR RAISED OBJECTIONS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE DETAILS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND WHEREAS THE AO WAS DEPRIVED TO VERIFY AND EXAMINE THE EVIDE NCES AND PRAYED FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL. 6. WE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATERIAL ON RECORD. PRIMA FACIE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS BEST JUDGMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT AS NO EVIDENCE WAS PROD UCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITS BY FOR VAR IOUS REASONS. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE, HAVING CHRONIC AILMENT AND ILLNESS AND SUPPORTED WITH MEDICAL CERT IFICATE FROM MANIPAL HOSPITAL AT PAGE 26 AND THE DEATH CERTIFICA TE AT PAGE 27 OF PAPER BOOK. WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE IS REPRESEN TED BY THE LEGAL HEIR AND IS READY TO SUBSTANTIATE AND EXPLAIN CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND REFERRED TO PAGES 14 T O 23 OF THE PAPER BOOK. WE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES AND ILLNESS OF THE ASSESSEE, ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IS A FIT CASE TO RESTORE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO MEET THE ENDS OF J USTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE RESTORE THE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUE A LONG WITH EVIDENCES FILED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO ADJUDICATE AFRESH AND CONSIDER THE MATERIAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FUR THER THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE OPPORTUNI TY OF HEARING AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER AND WE ORDER ACCO RDINGLY. ITA NO.2201/BANG/2018 PAGE 6 OF 6 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD APRIL, 2019. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : BENGALURU D A T E : 03/04/2019 SRINIVASULU, SPS COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)- 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE