PRAHALAD SAHAI SHARMA, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 240/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99367 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 240/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI PRAHLAD SAHAI SHARMA S/O SHRI KHETILAL BAD KE BALAJI, TEHSIL SANGANER JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 7 (2) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AEPPS 4307 B VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL , CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT -DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 12/10/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 /10/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR DATED 20-12-2012 FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ACTION TAKEN U/S 148 AND CONSEQUENT ORDER PASSED U/ S 147 IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DECIDING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF THE HEARING. 2.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE NOTICES ISSUED ON 7-7-2011, 28-11-2011, 22-09-2012, 22-11-2 012, ITA NO. 240/JP/2013 SHRI PRAHALAD SAHAI SHARMA VS. ITO, WARD- 7 (2), J AIPUR . 2 13-12-2012 AND 19-12- 2012 IGNORING THAT ON EARLIER DATES NO HEARING TOOK PLACE FOR ONE OR OTHER REASON. THER EAFTER ON 14-12-2012 FRESH NOTICE WAS ISSUED FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 19-12-2012 WHICH WAS WRONGLY NOTED BY THE COUNS EL AS 19-02-2012. FOR THIS REASON ON 19-12-2012 COUNSEL O F THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN CASE OF RAGHUVIR SINGH BUT NOTHING WAS DISCUSSED ABOUT THIS CASE, EV EN THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT GIVE ANY SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO DECIDE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE. THUS THE EX-PARTE OR DER PASSED BY THE EVEN THOUGH ON THIS DATE COUNSEL OF ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON 19-12-2012 IS ILL EGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 9.00 LACS BY TREATING TH E CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED. 2.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT BY MISTAKE THE OFFICE OF THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE NOTED THE DATE OF FIXING THE HEARING AS 19-02-2013 INSTEAD OF 19-12-2012. THUS THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT ASS ESSEE'S APPEAL HAS BEEN ADJOURNED TO 19-02-2013. IN THE MEANWHILE, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 20-12-2012. SINCE THE ASSESSE E WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE INASMUCH IT RELIED ON THE DATE OF HEARING PROVIDED BY THE COUNSELS OFFICE. THE APPEAL MAY BE SET ASIDE AND R ESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDS THAT THE SETTING ASIDE OF THE APPEAL MAY REQUIRE SOME RE MAND REPORT. THEREFORE, IT WILL BE IN THE FITNESS OF THE THINGS THAT THE APPEAL IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 2.2 THE LD. DR IS HEARD. ITA NO. 240/JP/2013 SHRI PRAHALAD SAHAI SHARMA VS. ITO, WARD- 7 (2), J AIPUR . 3 2.3 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREV ENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THERE FORE, IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS SET ASID E AND RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE IT AFRESH BY PROVIDING REASONAB LE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 /10/ 2015. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 12 /10/ 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI PRAHALAD SAHAI SHARMA, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- 7 (2), JAIPUR 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. 240/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR