SHRI BALWANT SINGH , HOSHIARPUR V. INCOME TAX OFICER WARD -1, HOSHIARPUR

ITA 279/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7136 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHAWANI SHANKAR
• Section: 133(6); 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH SMC AT JALANDHAR BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO.279/ASR./2018 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2010-11 BALWANT SINGH, S/O SH. ROOP CHAND, VILL.- NAVNEETPUR, P.O. BARIAN KALAN, TEHSIL GARHSHANKAR, DISTT. HOSHIARPUR VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HOSHIARPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. BVMPS3165A ASSESSEE BY : SH. NIRMAL MAHAJAN, CA REVENUE BY : SH. BHAWAN I SHANKAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 11.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.01.2019 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2018 OF LD. CIT(A)-1,JALANDHAR. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L: 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) FELL INTO GRAVE ERROR IN HOLDING THE IMPUGNED APPEAL AS BELATED AND HENCE NOT ADMITTING THE SAME. 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.8,20 ,810/- MADE BY THE AO. 3. ANY OTHER GROUND WHICH MAY BE RAISED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. VIDE GROUND NO. 1, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE NON-ADMISSION OF THE APPEAL BY THE LD. CIT(A). ITA NO. 279/ASR./2018 BALWANT SIN GH 2 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE AO ON TH E BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION REGARDING THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.93,58 ,102/- IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, ASKED THE ASSE SSEE U/S 133(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED T O AS THE ACT) TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED. SINCE, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE, THE AO ISSUED THE NOTICE U/S 148 R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME WHEREIN THE INCOME WAS DECLARED AT RS.1,15,0 00/-. THE AO, HOWEVER, FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT AT RS.9,35,810/- BY MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.8,20,810/-. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY OBSERVING THAT IT WAS DELAY ED AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. 6. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NO DEFECT MEMO WAS ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AN D THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE HER WAS WITHIN TIME. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL BY CONSIDERING THE SAME AS BELATED. 7. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED T HE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 8. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CA SE, IT APPEARS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT ISSUING DEFECT MEMO RELATING TO DELA Y IN FILING THE APPEAL, IF ANY, DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. I, THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, DEEM IT APPR OPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE ITA NO. 279/ASR./2018 BALWANT SIN GH 3 BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED AF RESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16/01/2019) SD/- (N. K. SAINI) VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 16/01/2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR