RAJIV R. AHUJA, MUMBAI V. JCIT 25(2), MUMBAI

ITA 3233/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8720 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR YADAV
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 69C; 40A(3); 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3233/MUM/2016 : A.Y : 2010 - 11 SHRI RAJIV R. AHUJA 301, DORA ROSE, I.C. COLONY, BORIVALI (W), MUMBAI 400 103 PAN : AADPA6445J (APPELLANT) VS. JCIT - 25(2), MUMBAI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH KUMAR YADAV DATE OF HEARING : 25/10/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25/10/2017 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU , AM : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 44 , MUMBAI DATED 23.02.2016 , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 , WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, MUMBAI DATED 26.03.2013 UNDER SECT ION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ADDITIONS OF RS.32,17,253/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER VARIOUS HEADS, NAMELY, LATE DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND AN D 2 ITA NO. 3233/MUM/2016 SHRI RAJIV R. AHUJA ESIC U/S 36(1)(VA) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) OF THE ACT, UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C AND 40A(3) OF THE ACT. NOTABLY, THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE ON THE GROUND THAT INSPITE OF PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTEND AND THEREFORE IT IMPLIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. 3. WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT IT WAS DEEMED FIT TO REJECT THE SAME AS TH E APPEAL CAN BE DISPOSED OFF ON A SHORT POINT. NOTABLY, THE CIT(A) WAS OBLIGATED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED U/S 250(6) OF THE ACT. SEC. 250(6) OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. IN THE CONTEXT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 250(6) OF THE ACT, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS UNTENABLE INASMUCH AS THE CIT(A) HAS NOT REFERR ED TO THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HIS DECISION THEREON. INSTEAD, HE HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL MERELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWED HIS DISINTEREST IN PURSUING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. COMPLIANCE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 250(6) OF THE ACT IS CONSPICUOUS BY ITS ABSENCE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND, THEREFORE, ON THIS POINT ITSELF, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO SET - ASIDE THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WHO SHALL ADJUDICATE THE MATTER DE NOVO AS PER LAW. NEEDLESS TO M ENTION, THE CIT(A) SHALL ALLOW THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND ONLY THEREAFTER PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL AS PER LAW. 3 ITA NO. 3233/MUM/2016 SHRI RAJIV R. AHUJA 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED, AS ABOVE. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 25 TH OCTOBER, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - (RAM LAL NEGI) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 2 5 T H OCTOBER, 2017 *SSL* COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, A BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI