Shri Satish P.Kunji, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Circle-14(1)., Ahmedabad

ITA 2345/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0558 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: PF JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: SHRI D.K. TYAGI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SATISH P. KUNJI. 9, AISHWARY BUNGLOWS, NR. UMA PARTI PLOT, OPP. HOTEL JAUNT SAFARI, MOTERA, CHANDKHEDA. AHMEDABAD-380005 (APPELLANT) PAN NO. AJSPK5252H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14 (1) AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SRI RAHUL KUMAR, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SRI P. F. JAIN, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 26-02-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28- 02-2013 / ORDER PER : D.K TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-XXI DATED 26-09-2012. I.T.A. NO. 2345/AHD/2012 A.Y.:-2009-10 ITA NO. 2345/AHD/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 PAGE NO SATISH P. KUNJI VS. ITO 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPE AL:- 1 THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY WRONGLY OBSERVING THA T NO EXPLANATION OR EVIDENCE WERE FILED ALONG WITH APPEAL MEMO WITHO UT APPRECIATING THE STATEMENT OF FACTS OF THE APPEAL MEMO. 2 HE HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3 ON THE FACTS THE APPELLANT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GRA NTED FURTHER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN THE INTEREST OF NATUR AL JUSTICE AND HIS APPEAL OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ALLOWED. 4 HE HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS DETAILED BELOW WIT HOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANT IN ITS PROPER PERSPECTIV E. A) CAPITAL GAIN AS PER PARA 3. RS. 3,07,557/- B) CASH DEPOSITS AS PER PARA 4. RS. 1,75,000/- C) SHARE INCOME AS PER PARA5. RS. 11,177/- D) INTEREST INCOME AS PER PARA6. RS. 62,400/- ---------------- RS. 5,56,134/- 5 ON THE FACTS THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY PASSING AN EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT DECIDING THE APPE AL ON MERITS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO PASSED AN ORDER BY SELECTIVELY USING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 25-11-2011 WIT HOUT MAKING ANY FURTHER INQUIRY OR ASKING FOR ANY DETAILS FROM THE ASSESSEE . HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED ITA NO. 2345/AHD/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 PAGE NO SATISH P. KUNJI VS. ITO 3 THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LOWER AUTHORITIES MAY KING LY BE SET ASIDE AND ASSESSEE BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT H IS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPOR T OF HIS CLAIM MADE BY HIM IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME. LD. D.R. DID NOT SERI OUSLY OBJECT TO THIS PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTU NITIES OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PU RPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (D .K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 28 /02/2013 A.K. / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , ! , '# / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. $% &' / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , ( / ' ) ! , '#