DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh V. Smt. Gurmeet Sodhi, Chandigarh

ITA 274/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9990 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-05-2019
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH GUPTA
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 132

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, A, CHANDIGARH . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 1522 TO 1528/CHD/2018 ! / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 TO 2014-15 SMT. GURMEET SODHI, #1620, SECTOR 18-D CHANDIGARH VS. '# THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH $ % ./ PAN NO: ACLPS0597B $&/ APPELLANT ()$& / RESPONDENT & ./ ITA NOS. 268 TO 274/CHD/2018 ! / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 TO 2014-15 THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH VS. '# SMT. GURMEET SODHI, #1620, SECTOR 18-D CHANDIGARH $ % ./ PAN NO: ACLPS0597B $&/ APPELLANT ()$& / RESPONDENT *+ , - / ASSESSEE BY : SH. SUDHIR SEHGAL, ADVOCATE (PROXY COUNSEL FOR SH. TEJ MOHAN SINGH, ADVOCATE) , - / REVENUE BY : SH. ASHISH GUPTA, CIT DR . / , +0% / DATE OF HEARING : 14.05.2019 12! , +0% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.05.2019 / ORDER ITA NOS.1522 TO1528-C-18 & 268 TO274-C-18- SMT.GURMEET SODHI, CHANDIGARH 2 PER BENCH : THE CAPTIONED APPEALS RELATE TO THE SAME ASSESSEE A ND HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BOTH BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE, CHA LLENGING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS)-3, GURGAON, [IN SHORT CIT(A)] DATED 26.12.2017 SEPAR ATELY FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y) 2008-09 TO 2014-15, U/S 153A( 1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ACT ). THE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THE CAPTIONED APPEALS WERE SIMILAR. ALL THE APPEALS WERE, THEREFORE, HEARD TOG ETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAK E OF CONVENIENCE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, BOTH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE P ARTIES HAVE STATED AT BAR THAT IN IDENTICAL MATTERS IN THE CASE OF OTHER ASSESSEES BELONGING TO THE SAME GROUP, THE MATTER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUNDS THAT BOTH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES I.E. ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS OF THE LD . CIT(A) ARE EX-PARTE ORDERS AND FURTHER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE ASSESSEE THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITI ES WAS NOT INTENTIONAL. EVEN THE REVENUE IS ALSO AGGRIEVED BY THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON CERTAIN POINTS AND THAT IS WHY THE REVEN UE HAS ALSO FILED THE CAPTIONED APPEALS. ITA NOS.1522 TO1528-C-18 & 268 TO274-C-18- SMT.GURMEET SODHI, CHANDIGARH 3 3. THE TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT SUBM ISSIONS IN THE IDENTICAL CASE OF THE DCIT, CHANDIGARH VS. SH. JAT INDER SINGH, CHANDIGARH PASSED IN ITA NOS. 276 & 278/CHD/201 8 & ORS. ORDER DATED 10.5.2019, HAS RESTORED THE MATTER IN RELATIO N TO THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AS WELL AS REVENUES APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS R EPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE ACT ON 21.2.2014. THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT U/S 153A READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FRAMED ON THE ASSESSEE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS, MAKING SEVERAL ADDITIONS TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSE. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL TO THE LD.CIT(A) AGAINST THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDERS, WHO PARTLY ALLOWED TH E ASSESSEES APPEALS. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE HAVE COME UP IN APPEAL BEFORE US IN TH E IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS. 4. AT THE OUTSET ITSELF, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE LD.CIT(A) IN ALL THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS INVOLVED HAD PASSED EX-PARTE ORDERS. IT WAS POINTED OUT FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEES APPEALS WERE DISMISSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) FOR NON REPRESENTATION, AS ON THE DATE MENTIONED IN THE ORDERS, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE. IT WA S FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE LD.CIT(A) ADJUDICATED THE VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE HIM ON MERITS EX- PARTE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS SINCE THE NOTICES WERE NOT RECEIVED BY HIM. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ITA NOS.1522 TO1528-C-18 & 268 TO274-C-18- SMT.GURMEET SODHI, CHANDIGARH 4 CORRECT BUT STILL THE NOTICES FOR THE SPECIFIC DATE S WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE PLEADED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE APPEALS BE RESTORED BAC K FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PLACE FRESH EVIDENCES ON RECORD WHICH WOULD NEED TO BE VERIFIED BY THE A.O.. THE LD.COUNSEL PLEADED THAT THE APPEALS THEREFORE BE RESTORED BACK TO THE A.O. FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESS EE POINTED OUT THAT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEES BELONGING TO THE GROUP WHICH HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO SEARCH ACTION AND WHEREIN ALSO BOTH THE A.O. AND THE CIT(A) ORDERS WERE EX-PARTE ORDERS, THE ITAT HAD RESTORED BACK THE APPEALS TO THE AO. OUR ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF M/S KUDOS HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., M/S KUDOS AGROHOLS LTD., M/S KUDOS CHEMIE LTD. IN ITA NO.1134 TO 1146/CHD/2018 DATED 28-0319,COPY OF WHICH WAS PLACED BEFORE US AND ALSO IN THE CASE OF DIRECTOR OF THE AFORESAID COMPANIES ,SHRI KABIR SODHI IN ITA NO.1300 TO 1301/CHD/2018 DATED 20.3.2019, COPY OF WHICH WAS ALSO PLACED BEFORE US 6. THE LD. DR FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE APPEALS IN THE CASE OF OTHER ASSESSEES RELATING TO THE SAME GROUP HAD BEEN RESTORED BACK TO THE A.O. BY THE I.T.A.T. ON NOTING THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) WERE EX-PARTE ORDERS AS ALSO THOSE PASSED BY THE A.O. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECOR D. UNDOUBTEDLY, BOTH THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS AND THE CIT(A)S ORDERS WERE EX-PARTE ORDERS AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED AT BAR THAT THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY COULD NOT BE ATTENDED SINCE THE NOTICES ISSUED FOR HEARING OF THE APPEALS WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER WE HAVE ALSO NOTED THE FACT T HAT ITA NOS.1522 TO1528-C-18 & 268 TO274-C-18- SMT.GURMEET SODHI, CHANDIGARH 5 THE APPEALS IN THE CASE OF OTHER COMPANIES AND IN THE CASE OF DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANIES BELONGING TO THE SAME GROUP AS THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS SEARCHED AND IN WHICH CASE ALSO, THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW WERE EX-PARTE ORDERS, HAVE BEEN RESTORED BACK BY THE ITAT TO THE A.O. FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH. WE HAVE ALSO NOTED THAT EVEN THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE EX-PARTE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) IN TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2014-15. 8. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONSIDER IT FIT TO RESTORE THE IMPUGNED APPEALS BACK TO THE A.O. WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORD ER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. W HILE SO DIRECTING, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE SH ALL NOT ABUSE THE TRUST REPOSED ON IT, IN WHICH CASE TH E A.O. SHALL BE FREE TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 9. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A ND THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES THE MATTER HAS ALSO BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE CASE OF SHRI KABIR SODHI, CHANDIGARH VS. ACIT, CHANDIGARH, PASSED IN ITA NO S. 1300 & 1301/CHD/2018 ORDER DATED 20.3.2019. 5. AS REQUESTED BY BOTH THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F DCIT VS. JATINDER SINGH ORDER DATED 10.5.2019 (SUPRA), THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH SIMILAR DIRECTIONS AS IS SUED IN THE CASE OF SHRI JATINDER SINGH & ORS, (SUPRA). ITA NOS.1522 TO1528-C-18 & 268 TO274-C-18- SMT.GURMEET SODHI, CHANDIGARH 6 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES AND THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.05.2019 SD/- SD/- ( . . / N.K. SAINI) ( ! / SANJAY GARG) '#$ / VICE PRESIDENT % & / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 22. 05. 2019 .. 3 , (+45 65!+ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $& / THE APPELLANT 2. ()$& / THE RESPONDENT 3. . 7+ / CIT 4. . 7+ ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 58 (+9 , 0 9 , :;<= / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. < >/ / GUARD FILE 3 . / BY ORDER, ? / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR