Shri Dharmendra P.Upadhyay, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-13(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2646/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1895 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOVIND SINGHAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G A MEHTA
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2646 & 2795/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2006-07 DATE OF HEARING:2.12.09 DRAFTED:3.12.09 SHRI DHARMENDRA P UPADHYAY, M/73/866, PANCHWATI APTS. OPP. PETROL PUMP. SOLA ROAD, NARANPURA, AHMEDABAD -380 013 PAN NO.AANPU4688D V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(4), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI G. A MEHTA, AR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI GOVIND SINGHAL, SR. DR O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ARISING OUT O F THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XXI, AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)- XXI/266/AHD/WD.13(4)/2008-09 AND CIT(A)-XXI/24/WD.1 3(4)/09-10 OF DIFFERENT DATE 23-07-2009 AND 07-08-2009. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAM ED BY THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(4), AHMEDABAD U/S.144(1)(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORD ER DATED 30-12-2008. THE PENALTY UNDER DISPUTE WAS LEVIED U/S.271(1)(B) OF THE ACT B Y ITO WARD-13(4), AHMEDABAD VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 18-06-2009. FIRST WE WILL DEAL WITH ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO .2646/AHD/2009. ITA NO.2646 & 2795/AHD/2009 A.Y. 2006-07 SH. DHARMENDRA P PUPADHYAY V. ITO WD-13(4) ABD PAGE 2 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS A PPEAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED A NON-SPEAKING ORDER WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION, CITATION AND OTHER EVIDENCES. FOR THIS, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAI SED THE FOLLOWING GROUND NO.1 & 2 :- 1. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS E RRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT BY PASSING A NON-SPEAKING ORDER AND WITHOUT CONTROVERT ING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND CITATION AND OTHER EVIDENCES FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL HEARING ON 13 -07-2009. 2. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ER RED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER U/S. 144(1)(B) PASSED BY THE AO WHICH IS ILLEGAL AN D BAD IN LAW AND HENCE BE CANCELLED AS THERE WAS A REASONABLE WHICH WAS EXPLA INED IN WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED WITH LD CIT(A). 3. BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CLEARLY S TATED THAT EVEN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED U/S.144 OF THE ACT. WHEN T HIS FACT WAS NOTICED FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AS WELL AS ASSESSMENT ORDER, WE FIN D THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS APPEAL BY GIVING FOLLOWING FINDING IN PARA-4 AND 4.1 :- 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.144(1)(B). I HAVE ALSO EXAMINED THE GROUNDS ALONG WITH WRITTEN S UBMISSIONS. 4.1 AFTER A COMPARATIVE AND CAREFUL STUDY OF THE AS SESSMENT ORDER, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, I AM INCLINED TO AG REE WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. ITO. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER I S APPROVED AS IT IS. 4. WE FIND FROM THE ABOVE FINDINGS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GONE INTO THE DETAILS AND DECIDED THIS APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING ANY FINDING OR ANY REASON FOR DISMISSING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS A NON-SPEAKING ORDER AND CANNOT STAND TO THE SCRUTINY OF THE FACTS. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THIS APPEAL IN ENTERITY TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH AFTER PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. THIS ISSUE OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOS ES. NOW COMING TO ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2795/AHD/ 2009. 5. IT IS SEEN THAT THIS APPEAL IS ON ACCOUNT OF LEV Y OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT AS THE ABOVE QUANTUM APPEAL ( ITA NO.2646/AHD/2009) HAS BEEN ITA NO.2646 & 2795/AHD/2009 A.Y. 2006-07 SH. DHARMENDRA P PUPADHYAY V. ITO WD-13(4) ABD PAGE 3 SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) AFRESH, THIS APPEAL IS ALSO SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFTER THE DECISION IN QUANTUM APPEAL. TH IS ISSUE OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 02/12/2009 SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 02/12/2009 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- XXI, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD