DURGA KUMARI MOHAMMAD, AKIVIDU V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHIMAVARAM

ITA 302/VIZ/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5335 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण,धिशाखापटणमपीठ,धिशाखापटणम INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAMBENCH,VISAKHAPATNAM शीद ु व्वआरएलरेडी,नाधयकसदसएिंशीएसबालाकृष्,लेखासदसकेसमक BEFORESHRIDUVVURURLREDDY,HON’BLEJUDICIALMEMBER & SHRISBALAKRISHNAN,HON’BLEACCOUNTANTMEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 (निर्धररवरध/AssessmentYear:2015-16&2016-17) DurgaKumariMohammad 20-23,MadakavariStreet,Akividu WestGodavariDistrict–534235 AndhraPradesh. [PAN:DMKPM3133F] v.IncomeTaxOfficer–Ward–1 Bhimavaram WestGodavariDistrict AndhraPradesh (अपीलार्/Appellant)(प्र्/Respondent) करद्त्क्पनतनिनरध/AssesseeRepresentedby :K.SivaRamKumar,AR र्जसक्पनतनिनरध/DepartmentRepresentedby :Dr.AparnaVilluri,Sr.AR सुिव्ईसम्पहोिेकीनतनि /DateofConclusionofHearing :02.09.2024 घोरर्कीत्रीख/DateofPronouncement :05.09.2024 आदेश/ORDER PERSHRIDUVVURURLREDDY,JUDICIALMEMBER: 1.TheseappealsarefiledbytheassesseeagainstdifferentordersofLearned CommissionerofIncomeTax(Appeals),[hereinafterinshort“Ld.CIT(A)”], NationalFacelessAppealCentre(NFAC),DelhiinDIN&OrderNos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065191569(1)&ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 DURGAKUMARIMOHAMMAD PageNo.2 25/1065191412(1)dated28.05.2024arisingoutoforderspassedUndersection 147r.w.s.144oftheIncomeTaxAct,1961(inshort‘Act’)dated29.09.2021and 25.09.2021fortheA.Y.2015-16&2016-17respectively. 2.Sincetheissuesraisedinboththeseappealsareidentical,therefore,forthe sakeofconvenience,theseappealsareclubbed,heardanddisposedoffbythis consolidatedorder.WearetakingAppealinITA.No.301/VIZ/2024for AssessmentYear2015-16asaleadappeal. 3.Brieflystatedfactsofthecasearethat,assesseeisahomemakeranda partnerinthepartnershipfirmentitledM/s.SubhamDevelopers.Assesseehas notfiledreturnofincomefortheA.Y.2015-16.AssessingOfficerreceived informationfromtheADIT(Inv),Unit-IIII(4),Rajamahedravaram,thatthe assesseehadmadeinvestmentsinafirmM/s.SubhamDevelopersandshehad alsoreceivedincomefromthefirmintheF.Y.2014-15,howevertheassesseehas notfiledtheIncomeTaxReturnforA.Y.2015-16.Consequently,Assessing Officerreopenedtheassessmentafterrecordingreasonsforreopening.Notice undersection148oftheActdated23.03.2020wasissuedanddulyservedonthe assesseeandaskedtofilethereturnofincomefortheA.Y.2015-16. Subsequently,noticesundersection142(1)oftheActwerealsoissuedtothe assesseefromtimetotimeseekingrelevantinformation/documents.However, assesseecouldnotfileanyreplyforthenoticesissuedbytheAssessingOfficer. AssessingOfficerproceededtocompletetheassessmentundersection147r.w.s. I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 DURGAKUMARIMOHAMMAD PageNo.3 144oftheActbyassessingtheincomeoftheassesseeatRs.1,31,48,343/- consideringthetotalshare(10.90%)investmentsofRs.2,07,100/-inM/s.Subham Developersforpurchaseoflandsasincomeoftheassesseebeingunexplained investmentundertheheadincomefromothersourcesandRs.1,29,41,243/-being unexplainedreceiptsundertheheadincomefromothersources. 4.Onbeingaggrieved,assesseepreferredanappealbeforeLd.CIT(A)but theassesseeevenafterreceiptofthehearingnoticesonvariousdatesdidnotfile anysupportingdocumentsonhercontentionsasperthegroundsofappealraised byher.Therefore,theLd.CIT(A)disposedoffthisappealbasedonthemerits availableonrecord. 5.Onbeingaggrieved,assesseepreferredanappealbeforeusandraised followinggroundsofappeal:- “1.Inthefactsandcircumstancesofcase,learnedCIT(Appeals)ought tohaveconsideredthefactsofthecaseandtheGroundsofAppealtakenin theAppealMemorandum,beforedismissaloftheappealexparte. 2.LearnedCIT(Appeals)erredinnotconsideringtheappellant's primaryobjectiontotheassumptionofjurisdictionbythelearnedAOas thetransactionsonwhichtheNoticeswereissuedandshewasqueried, neverbelongedtoher;theassessmentwasmadeontheappellantby reckoningtheoncomeattheproportionategrosssaleconsiderationofthe saleofstock(propertysoldbyadeveloper-firm)byapartnershipfirm, whichwasbadinlaw. 3.TheappellantcravesleavetoaddoramendanyGroundof Appeal” 6.Attheoutset,Ld.AuthorisedRepresentative[hereinafter“Ld.AR”] submittedthatAssessingOfficeraswellasLd.CIT(A)passedexparteorder I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 DURGAKUMARIMOHAMMAD PageNo.4 withoutprovidingadequateopportunityofbeingheardtotheassessee,therefore, consideringadditions/disallowancemadebytheAssessingOfficer,Ld.AR pleadedthatthemattermayberemittedbacktothefileoftheLd.CIT(A). 7.Ontheotherhand,Ld.DepartmentalRepresentative[hereinafterinshort “Ld.DR”]reliedontheorderoftheLd.CIT(A)andsubmittedthatassesseehas notutilizedtheopportunityprovidedbyAssessingOfficeraswellasLd.CIT(A). Therefore,theorderpassedbyLd.CIT(A)isexparteorderandshepleadedto confirmtheorderspassedbytheRevenueAuthorities. 8.Wehaveheardboththesidesandperusedthematerialavailableonrecord. OnaperusaloftheassessmentorderandLd.CIT(A)order,wefindthateven thoughtheAssessingOfficerandLd.CIT(A)providedopportunityonseveral occasions,assesseecouldnotappearnorcompliedtothenoticesissued. ConsideringsubmissionsoftheLd.ARandtotalityoffactsandkeepinginview theadditions/disallowancemadebytheAssessingOfficer,weareoftheopinion thatassesseeshouldbegivenonemoreopportunityofbeingheard.Therefore, consideringthefactsandcircumstancesofthecaseandinordertomeetthe principlesofnaturaljustice,weareoftheviewthatitisafitcasetoremitthe matterbacktothefileoftheLd.CIT(A)forfreshconsiderationandtheassessee isdirectedtocooperatewiththeproceedingsbeforetheLd.CIT(A)andinturn Ld.CIT(A)callforremandreport,ifnecessary,anddisposeoffthecaseon I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 DURGAKUMARIMOHAMMAD PageNo.5 merits.Therefore,thegroundsraisedbytheassesseeareallowedforstatistical purposes. 9.Intheresult,appealoftheassesseeisallowedforstatisticalpurposes. ITANo.302/VIZ/2024(A.Y.2016-17) 10.ComingtotheappealrelatingtoA.Y.2016-17,sincefactsinthiscaseare mutatismutandis,thereforethedecisiontakeninITANo.301/VIZ/2024forthe A.Y.2015-16isapplicabletothisassessmentyearalso.Accordingly,appealfiled bytheassesseeisallowedforstatisticalpurposes. 11.Intheresult,appealoftheassesseeisallowedforstatisticalpurposes. 12.Tosum-up,boththeappealsfiledbytheassesseeareallowedforstatical purposes. Orderpronouncedintheopencourton05 th September,2024. Sd/- (एसबालाकृष्) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) लेखासदस /ACCOUNTANTMEMBER Sd/- (द ु व्वआर.एलरेडी) (DUVVURURLREDDY) नाधयकसदस /JUDICIALMEMBER Dated:.05.09.2024 Giridhar,Sr.PS I.T.A.Nos.301&302/VIZ/2024 DURGAKUMARIMOHAMMAD PageNo.6 आदेशकीपनतनलनपअगेनरत /Copyoftheorderforwardedto:- 1. निर्धारती /TheAssessee :DurgaKumariMohammad 20-23,MadakavariStreet,Akividu WestGodavariDistrict–534235 AndhraPradesh. 2. र्जस /TheRevenue :IncomeTaxOfficer–Ward–1 Bhimavaram WestGodavariDistrict AndhraPradesh 3.ThePrincipalCommissionerofIncomeTax 4.नवभ्गीयपनतनिनर,आयकरअपीलीयअनरकरर,नवश्ख्पटरम/DR,ITAT,Visakhapatnam 5.TheCommissionerofIncomeTax 6.ग्रधफ़्ईल/Guardfile //TrueCopy// आदेश्िुस्र/BYORDER Sr.PrivateSecretary ITAT,Visakhapatnam