M/s Arjun Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., Firozabad V. I.T.O.-5(1), Firozabad

ITA 326/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0541 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 9 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-04-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 17-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 148; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.326/AGR/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 M/S. ARJUN TRADING CO. PVT. LTD., VS. INCOME TAX O FFICER 5(1), A-4, GANESH NAGAR, FIROZABAD. FIROZABAD. (PAN : AADCA 7230 J). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI DEEPENDRA MOHAN, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 01.04.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.04.2013 ORDER PER A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.03.2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II, AGRA FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2003-04. 2. THE CONCISE GROUNDS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT APPEALS HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS UNDER SECTION 2 ITA NO.326/AGRA/2012 A.Y. 2003-04 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SOLELY BASED ON THE REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATION WING DEPARTMENT. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT APPEALS HAS ERRED IN LAW AN D ON FACTS IN NOT CONSIDERING THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HURRIEDLY PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 29/12/2010 WITHOUT G IVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT AFTER DISPOSING OFF TH E OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON 28.12.2010. 3. THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN MAKING ADDITION ON THE WHOLE SHARE APPLICATION AMOU NT OF RS.59,80,000/- WHEREAS THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE APPELLATE WAS ISSUED OF ONLY RS.8,01,500/-. 4. THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY CONSIDERING THE WHOLE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF TH E APPELLANT AS BOGUS WITHOUT HAVING ANY COGENT MATERIAL OR MAKING ANY SUBSTANTIAL ENQUIRY. 5. THAT THE ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FAC TS OF THE CASE. 6. THAT ANY OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS DEEMED FIT IN T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MAY BE GRANTED. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR VARY THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE TRADING OF CRAFT MEDIA PAPER. THE CASE OF THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 15.03.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OBTAINED ENTRIES O F RS.5,00,750/-, 34,00,750/- ON 19.02.2003 AND 11.01.2003 FROM J. SINGH TRADING & I NVESTMENT (PVT) LTD., NEW DELHI IN HE F.Y. 2002-03 AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY , TOTALING TO RS.8,00,000/-. 3 ITA NO.326/AGRA/2012 A.Y. 2003-04 THE ASSESSEE OBJECTED REOPENING WHICH WAS DISPOSED OF BY THE A.O. ON 28.12.2010. THE A.O. PASSED ASSESSMENT ORDER ON ME RIT ON 29.12.2010. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR. THE CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. 4. THE ASSESSEE FILED SECOND PAPER BOOK CONTAINING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH CARRIES PAGE NOS.32 TO 143. IN THE APPLICATION UND ER RULE 29 OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T THE A.O. MADE THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AS THE LEGAL ISSUE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISPOSED OF BY THE A.O. ON 28.12.2010 AND WITHOUT FURTHER OPPORTUNITY THE A.O. PASSED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2010. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO DID NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PAR TIES AND RECORDS PERUSED. WE FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THA T THE A.O. AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) BOTH PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. AS THE LEGAL ISSUE CHALLE NGING REOPENING BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISPOSED BY THE A.O. ON 28.12.2010 AND ON NEXT DATE I.E. 29.12.2010 THE CASE WAS DECIDED ON MERIT WHICH ITSELF IS EVIDENCE THAT SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE 4 ITA NO.326/AGRA/2012 A.Y. 2003-04 OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSES. SIMI LAR IS THE POSITION BEFORE THE CIT(A). 6. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ADMITTED AS THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THUS, THERE WERE SUFFICIENT REASONS FOR NOT PRODUCI NG THESE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. SINCE THE REVENUE DID NOT GET OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE AND GO THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, IN THE LIGHT OF T HE FACT, WE THINK IT PROPER TO SEND BACK THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF A.O. WITH THE DIRECTI ON TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONA L EVIDENCE AS WELL AS OTHER EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM AS AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD AND OTHERS AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT) SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (A.L. GEHLOT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PBN/* 5 ITA NO.326/AGRA/2012 A.Y. 2003-04 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY