Shri Guru Singh Sabha, Indore V. The AIO, Indore

ITA 316/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 31622714 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN DEWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S S SHEETAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 316/IND/2010 A.Y. 2005-06 SHRI GURU SINGH SABHA INDORE PAN AAETS 7391E . APPELLANT VS. AIO, 1(2), INDORE . RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 12. 9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.9.2011 APPELLANT BY SHRI S.S. SHEETAL RESPONDENT BY SHRI ARUN DEWAN ORDER PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 2.3.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT THE CIRCULAR AND THE REVISED CLAIM OF T HE ASSESSEE WERE NOT CONSIDERED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD SH RI S.S. SHEETAL,LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI ARUN DEWAN, LEARN ED SENIOR 2 DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE PRODUCED TDS CERT IFICATE AMOUNTING TO RS. 41,443/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 DUR ING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON THE PLEA THAT THE CERTIFICATES WERE RECEIVED LATE, THEREFORE, COULD NOT BE FILED. THE IMPUGNED ORDER A LSO HAS BEEN PASSED ON THE PLEA THAT THE CIRCULAR CLAIMED TO BE APPLICA BLE WAS NOT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSMEN T WAS FRAMED U/S 144 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL, THIS APPEAL IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR WHICH DUE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE WITH FURTHER LIBE RTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM, THEREFOR E, THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. 3 ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN T HE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 12.9.2011. SD SD (R.C. SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 13.9.2011 COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR