M/s Reliance International, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer-3(3), Kanpur

ITA 256/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4351 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.256/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ITO-3(3), KANPUR VS M/S RELIANCE INTERNATIONAL, 105/336A, CHAMANGANJ, KANPUR 208001 PAN AADFR 6987 J (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, DR RESPONDENT BY 15/07/2016 DATE OF HEARING 20 /07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A), KANPUR, INTER ALIA ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 01. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT GIVING OPPOR TUNITY , WHICH ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AND BE QUASHED. 02. BECAUSE THERE BEING NO NON-COMPLIANCE TO THE N OTICE ISSUED FOR HEARING, IN AS MUCH AS, THE APPEARANCE W AS PUT IN AND THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED ON THE GROU ND THAT THE APPEAL OF EARLIER YEAR WAS PENDING ADJUDIC ATION AND WAS IN THE PROCESS OF HEARING, THE CIT(A) HAS E RRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE. 03. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN L AW IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER WITHOUT GIVING ANY FINDING ON MERITS AND IGNORING T HE FACT THAT IN THE EARLIER YEARS, THE ADDITIONS MADE ON TH E SAME COUNTS HAVE BEEN DELETED BOTH BY THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS BY 2 THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND BY THE HO N'BLE HIGH COURT ALSO. 04. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN L AW IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,29,545/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEING INSURANCE PREMIUM OF THE PA RTNERS DEBITED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, WHICH AMOUNT HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE EARLIER YEARS. 05. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN L AW IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,17,884/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF LABOUR CHARGES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, WHICH AMOUNT HAS BEEN ALLOWE D IN THE EARLIER YEARS, THE DISALLOWANCE IS ARBITRARY, B AD IN LAW AND BE DELETED. 06. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN L AW IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.36,560/- MADE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD FR EIGHT & CARTAGE DEBITED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, WHICH AMOUNT HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE EARLIER YEARS, THE DISALLOW ANCE IS ARBITRARY, BAD IN LAW AND BE DELETED. 07. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN L AW IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.67,540/- MADE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF INTEREST PAID ON UNSECURED LOANS DEBITED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, WHICH AMOUNT HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE EARLIER YEARS, THE DISALLOWANCE IS ARBITRARY, BAD IN LAW AND BE DELETED. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED MY ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT CIT(A) HAS NO T DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT BUT DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE, WHEREA S THE CIT(A) WAS REQUIRED TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL ON MERIT EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR. 3. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), I FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE AND HAS RECORDED THAT ON VARIOUS DATES ASSESSEE APPEARED AN D SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. THOUGH CIT(A) HAS WRITTEN FEW LINES WI TH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE ON MERIT BUT ON ITS PERUSAL IT DOES NOT APPEA R TO ME THAT HE APPLIED 3 HIS MIND TO THE FACTS ON MERIT. I, THEREFORE, SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECTI ON TO READJUDICATE THE APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/- (S .K. YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20/07/2016 AKS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR