Rasmita Jena, Koraput V. ITO, Ward-1, Jeypore

ITA 310/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3880 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: L N SAHOO
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 310 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 RASMITAJENA, W/O RABIDNRA KUMAR JENA, AT: JELC SHOPPING COMPLEX JEYPORE, KORAPUT VS. ITO, WARD - 1, JEYPORE PAN/GIR NO. AGOPJ 7148 N (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI L.N.SAHOO, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 05 /04 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 /04 / 2017 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR, DATED 18.2.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE EX - PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE FIRST APPEAL ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.5,34.781.00 BY THE ID. A.O AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT AND ADDITION OF TH E SAME TO THE NET PROFIT DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE PROFIT & LOSS A/C IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW. 2 ITA NO. 310/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008 - 09 3. THAT THE APPELLANT HAVING INVESTED RS.2,15,650.00 IN THE EARLI ER ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. A.Y.2007 - 08, NON CONSIDERATION OF THE SAME BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW AND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNIT Y FOR REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE FORUMS BELOW, WHICH IS IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 5. THAT THE OTHER GROUNDS IF ANY WILL BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL AND THE APPELLANT BE ALLOWED A N OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 16.8.2016. THE REGISTRY ISSUED A DEFECT MEMO TO THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL FILED IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 81 DAYS AND CONDONATION PETITION WAS FILED WITHOUT AFFIDAVIT. THER EAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED AFFIDAVIT DATED 31.12.2016 TO SUPPORT THE CONDONATION PETITION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY, WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WAS RECEIVED ON 26.3.2016 BY THE ASSESSEE. AFTER RECEIPT OF THE ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE WAS SUFFERING FROM LOWER B ACK PAIN AND AS SUCH COULD NOT MEET HER ADVOCATE FOR HANDING OVER THE APPEAL MEMO WITH ORIGINAL PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, FOR WHICH, LAST DATE OF FILING OF APPEAL WAS 25.5.2016. THE ASSE SSEE RECOVERED FROM ILLNESS ON 18.6.2016 AND THEREAFTER THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 20.6.2016 AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS A DELAY OF 26 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL. 4. ON PERUSAL OF APPEAL PAPERS, I FIND THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 16.8.2016 AND NOT ON 20.6.2016 A S CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CONDONATION PETITION FILED. FURTHER, IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE APPEAL RECORDS 3 ITA NO. 310/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008 - 09 THAT THE APPEAL FEE WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE ON 5.8.2016 OF RS.7,000/ - AS EVIDENCED BY THE BANK CHALLAN OF UCO BANK OF INDIA, ASOKA MARKET BRANC H, BHUBANESWAR AND ON 27.9.2016 OF RS.743/ - AS EVIDENCED BY THE BANK CHALLAN OF STATE BANK OF INDIA , LINK ROAD, CUTTACK FOR RS.743 / - PLACED ON RECORD. THUS, IT IS CONCLUSIVELY FOUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 16.8.2016 AND NOT ON 20.6.2016. THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY OF 81 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL WITH COGENT AND PLAUSIBLE REASONS. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UN - ADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED AS UNADMITTED. . ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 /04 /2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 05 /04 /2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : RASMITAJENA, W/O RABIDNRA KUMAR JENA, AT: JELC SHOPPING COMPLEX JEYPORE, KORAPUT 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, WARD NO.1, JEYPORE 3. THE CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR. 4. PR.CIT - 1, BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//