Suresh Ramachandra Patil., Belgaum V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1), Belgaum., Belgaum

ITA 283/PAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 28324114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINAY SINGH RAWAT
• Section: 143(3); 54F

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 283/PNJ/2014 : (ASST. YEAR : 2008 - 09) SURESH RAMCHANDRA PATIL HALGEKAR COMPLEX, MAJGAON CROSS, KHANAPUR ROAD, UDYAMBAG, BELGAUM 590008 (APPELLANT) PAN : ADWPP6885H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1), BELGAUM (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : VINAY SINGH RAWAT DATE OF HEARING : 25/11/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 /11/2014 O R D E R PER P.K. BANSAL 1. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), BELGAUM DT. 13.6.2014. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO ADDUCE THE EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY HIS CLAIM MADE U/S 54F. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN ON 27.9.2008 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 1,57,440/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) AT AN INCOME OF RS.7,09,980/ - BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS : I. DIFFERENCE IN SALE VALUE - RS. 10,000/ - II. DISALLOWANCE U/S 54F - RS.5,42,537/ - THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). CIT( A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH AN 2 ITA NO. 283/PNJ/2014 (ASST. YEAR : 2008 - 09) APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS SENT WHICH, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PLAUSIBLE REASON, WAS REJECTED. 3. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR WE NOTED THAT IN THIS CASE THE C IT(A) HAS CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT BUT NOT PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY HIS CLAIM. EVEN IN RESPECT OF THE REMAND REPORT, THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO IS NOT FREE FROM SOME OBVIOUS DEFECTS. WE, THEREF ORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO RE - CONSIDER THIS ISSUE AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS APPRECIATING THE EVI DENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO ADDUCE ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY HIS CLAIM U/S 54F AS WELL AS THE SALE CONSIDERATION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS STATISTICALLY ALLOWED. 5. ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.11.2014. S D / - (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER S D / - (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 2 5 /11/ 201 4 *SSL* COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT CONCERNED (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER