M/S. Dev Carriers & Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Jajpur V. J.C.I.T. Range-1, Cuttack

ITA 295/CTK/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1691 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ PATRA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 201; 10; 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M.GARG , JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM (THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING) . / ITA NO. 295 /CTK/20 1 9 ( / A SSESSMENT Y EAR S : 20 10 - 20 11 ) M/S DEV CARRIERS & MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, STATION ROAD, JAJPUR ROAD, DISTRICT JAJPUR - 755019 VS. JCIT, RANGE - 1, CUTTACK PAN NO. : A ACCD 9220 C ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANOJ P ATRA, CA /REVENUE BY : SHRI SUBHENDU D A TTA, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 07 / 1 2 /20 20 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 / 1 2 /20 20 / O R D E R PER L.P.SAHU, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 27.02.2015 , PASSED BY THE CIT(A), CUTTACK FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 0 - 2011 . 2. AT THE OUTSET, DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT( A) HAS PASSED ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITIES FOR PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCES, WHICH IS GROSS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THE EXPENDITURES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE COMPLETELY MEANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS AND ARE GENUINE IN NATURE. LD. AR ALSO FILED A PAP ER BOOK CONTAINING WRITTEN SUBMISSION, DETAILS OF SHARE APPLICATION ITA NO. 295 /CTK/201 9 2 MONEY, DETAILS OF SHARE PREMIUM, DETAILS OF UNSECURED LOAN AND LEDGER COPY OF PROFESSIONAL & CONSULTANCY EXPENSES AND THESE DOCUMENTS COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN ABS ENCE OF PROPER OPPORTUNITIES. LD. AR ALSO REQUESTED BEFORE US THROUGH HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSION THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY KINDLY BE PROVIDED TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIMS OF THE ASSESSEE AND DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE A O. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER S OF CIT(A) AS WELL AS AO AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DELIBERATELY DID NOT COOPERATE WITH BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED BY THE LD. DR THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN PROVID ED TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE NEITHER AVAILED THE SAME NOR PRODUCED THE DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS. THEREFORE, THE AO RIGHTLY MADE DISALLOWANCE, TO WHICH NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. 4. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBM ISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED IN THE RECORD OF THE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.144 OF THE ACT. FROM THE PERUSAL O F THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS CIT(A)S ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BY PRODUCING THE DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCE AS REQUIRED BY BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW . HOWEVER, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US HAS FILED A PAPER BOOK ITA NO. 295 /CTK/201 9 3 CONTAINING 71 PAGES AND SUBMITTED THAT THE DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES CONTAINED THEREIN ARE VERY NECESSARY FOR DECISION OF THE CASE AND THOSE DOCUMENTS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW . IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED BY LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE B EFORE US THAT THE NON - COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS DUE TO CLOSURE OF BUSINESS AND NON - AVAILABILITY OF ACCOUNTS STAFF IN THE COMPANY. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE AP PEAL TO THE FILE OF AO FOR RE - ADJUDICATION ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUE S INVOLVED . THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO PLACE THE DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE US IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE SAME AFTE R DUE VERIFICATION AND EXAMINATION AND DECIDE THE ISSUE S AS PER LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE PROVIDED REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE AO POSITIVELY FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE CASE. THUS, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 / 12 / 20 20 . S D/ - (C.M.GARG) S D/ - (L.P.SAHU) / JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK ; DATED 07 / 12 /20 20 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA, SR.P.S. ITA NO. 295 /CTK/201 9 4 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) , /ITAT, CUTTACK 1. / THE APPELLANT - SRI ABHIMANYU PATRA, AT - NAN DAPUR, PO - BAJAPUR, KHURDA 2. / THE RESPONDENT - ITO, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//