Sh. Ram Kishan Verma, D.O., LIC., Agra V. ACIT, Agra

ITA 32/AGR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7064 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R K AGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 32/AGRA/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06 SH. RAM KISHAN VERMA, VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, D.O. LIC, 18/28, MAITHAN, AGRA. AGRA.(PAN ABEPV 3966 B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : S/SRI R.K. AGARWAL & RAHUL AGARWAL , ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI VINOD KUMAR, JR. D.R. ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, A.M. : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2009 OF CIT(A) BY TAKING FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS : 1. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA GROSSLY ERRED I N LAW AND FACTS IN SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.309249/- IN RESPECT O F DEDUCTION OF ACA/FCA MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES. IGNORING SO, THE LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA HAS IGNORED NUMBER OF JUDICIAL DECIS IONS. 2. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN SUSTAINING ADDITION OF RS.50,000/- MADE BY THE A.O. IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN DIFFERENT BANK ACCOUNTS. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ENDORSING THE VIEWS TAKEN BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT HEARING EITHER OF THE PARTIES. THE APPELLANT WAS ALSO NOT AFFORDED AD EQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS REACHED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON BOTH T HE ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE CONCLUSIONS OF ASSESSING OFFICER THAT KEEPING IN VIEW WITHDRAWAL OF MEAGER 2 AMOUNT FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES, IT COULD NOT BE POSS IBLE THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE INCURRED RS.3,09,249/- ON CONVEYANCE OR TO MAKE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. HOWEVER, THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE EXPLANATIONS GIVEN BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GET REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFOR E THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE LD. COUNSEL REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FI LE OF CIT(A) SO THAT THE APPELLANT MAY PUT UP ITS CASE ON MERIT AND SUBSTANTIATE THE SAME WITH EV IDENCE BEFORE HIM ON BOTH THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE. 3. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, CONTENDED THA T MORE THAN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN EXTENDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSE E IN FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THEREFORE, IT IS WRONG TO SAY THAT NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS AFFORDED TO HIM. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT TH E CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO AND THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THEREFORE, THE PRESEN T APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED ON MERITS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE ALS O GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORIT IES BELOW. WE NOTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT HEARING ANY OF THE PARTIES. THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRE THAT LITIGANTS SHOULD BE AFFORDED ADEQUATE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEAR ING THE ASSESSEE OR THE REVENUE AS IS CONSPICUOUS FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IN OUR OPINION , IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE APPELLANT SHOULD BE GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO PUT HIS CASE ON MERITS BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND TO LAY EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM S. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT (A) FOR DECIDING THE DISPUTED ISSUES DE NOVO 3 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESS EE SHALL BE GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE STANDS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN CURT ON 18.04.201 1. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (P.K. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 ND MAY, 2011 *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY