Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly V. M/s Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., Shahjahanpur

ITA 26/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 2623714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIVEK MISHRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.26, 27 & 28/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2006 - 07, 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 DY.C.I.T. - I, BAREILLY. VS. M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. TILHAR, SHAHJAHANPUR. PAN:AAAAK0207C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS.29 & 30/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006 - 07 & 2008 - 09 DY.C.I.T. - I, BAREILLY. VS. M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. POWAYAN, SHAJAHANPUR. PAN:AAAAK1635N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.31/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005 - 06 DY.C.I.T. - I, BAREILLY. VS. M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. SEMI KHERA, DISTT. BAREILLY. PAN:AAAAK3453A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY SHRI VIVEK MISHRA, CIT, D.R. REVENUE BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 23/06/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 4 /07/2014 O R D E R PER BENCH: ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE, WHICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A), BAREILLY ALL DATED 30 TH OCTOBER, 2013 FOR 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 TO 2008 - 09 IN THE CASE OF KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. , TILHAR, SHAHJAHANPUR, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 & 2008 - 09 IN THE CASE OF KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD., POWAYAN, SHAHJAHANPUR AND ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 0 6 IN THE CASE OF KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD., SEMI KHERA, BAREILLY. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN ANY OF THESE CASES INSPITE OF NOTICE AND HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THESE APPEALS EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A) IS VERY CRYPTIC IN ALL THESE CASES AND HE HAS SIMPLY NOTED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER W ITHOUT GIVING ANY REASON AND BASIS AND HENCE, HIS ORDER SHOULD BE REVERSED OR THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO HIS FILE FOR PASSING A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE. WE FIND FORCE IN TH E SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE BECAUSE THE CIT(A) HAS REPRODUCED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. THEREAFTER, HE HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN TWO LINES THAT HE HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE, PERUSED THE AS SESSMENT ORDER AND GONE THROUGH THE DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND KEEPING IT IN VIEW , THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DELETED. SINCE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER, WE SET ASI DE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN ALL THESE CASES AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION BY WAY OF PASSING A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE 3 CIT(A) SHOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE SIDES. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE SE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 0 4 /07/2014. *C.L.SINGH 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