, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBULAL; RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT. . .. . . .. . , ,, , . .. . . .. . , ,, ,$ $ $ $ BEFORE SHRI T. K. SHARMA, JM AND SHRI D. K. SRIVAST AVA, AM. ITA NO. 343/RJT/2011. / ASSESSMENT YEAR:-2003-04. / V/S. SHRI VASANTLAL MADHAVJI PATEL, UMIYA NAGAR, AT POST GADHASISHA, TA. MANDVI-KUTCH. ( +/ APPELLANT) THE I.TO., WARD(2),BHUJ. ,-+/ RESPONDENT ./ / ASSESSEE BY SHRI D. M. RINDANI, C.A. / / REVENUE BY SHRI AVINASH KUMAR, D.R. / / DATE OF HEARING 04-04-2012 / / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04 - 04-2012 / // / ORDER . .. . . .. . , ,, , / T. K. SHARMA, J. M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07-07-2011 OF CIT (A)-XX, A HMEDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04.. 2. THE VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED C.I.T. (APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S.148 O F THE ACT. ITA NO 343/RJT/2011. 2 2. THE LEARNED C.I.T. (APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD HAS E RRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF A SUM OF RS.6,45,00 0/- MADE BY THE A.O. BEING HIRE CHARGES PAID FOR PURCHASE OF ESCORT JCB 3 D LOADER CONSIDERING THE EXPENDITURE AS CAPITAL IN NA TURE. 3. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE , THE LEARNED C.I.T.(APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDIN G THE ACTION OF A.O. IN NOT ALLOWING THE PERMISSIBLE DEPRECIATIO N ON ESCORT JCB 3 D WHEN THE A.O. HIMSELF HAD CONSIDERED THE PAYMENT OF HIRE CHARGES AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR PURCHAS E OF THE ASSET. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, ON BEHALF OF A SSESSEE, SHRI D. M. RINDANI, C.A. APPEARED AND POINTED OUT THAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE BY REJEC TING THE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT MADE BY ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 24-0 6-2011. HE SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO CONFUSION IN RESPECT OF JURISDICTION, THE EA RLIER DATE COULD NOT BE ATTENDED HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THE GROUND NO.3 CHALLENGING THE REOPENI NG OF ASSESSMENT U/S.148. HE ACCORDINGLY, SUGGESTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE, IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BE SET-ASIDE AND HE BE DIRECTED TO DECIDE TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO B OTH THE SIDES. 4. SHRI AVINASH KUMAR, D.R. VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). THE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY WA S ALLOWED BY LD. CIT(A) THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NECESSITY OF ALLOWING ONE MO RE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, WE HAVE CAREFULLY G ONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. IT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THE GROUND NO.3 CHALLENGING REO PENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S.148. WE ARE THEREFORE OF THE VIEW THAT IT WILL MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE IF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BE UPHELD AND DIRECT HIM TO DEC IDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO B OTH THE SIDES. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO 343/RJT/2011. 3 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. /5 04 / 04 / 2012 7/ THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04/ 0 4/2012.. SD/- SD/- ( .. / D. K. SRIVASTAVA) ( .. / T. K. SHARMA) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER 5/ ORDER DATE 04 / 04/2012. /RAJKOT / // / ,: ,: ,: ,: ;: ;: ;: ;: / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1.+ / APPELLANT-VASANTLAL M. PATEL, MANDVI 2.,-+ / RESPONDENT- THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHUJ 3.? / CONCERNED CIT-I, RAJKOT 4. ?A / CIT (A)-XX, AHMEDABAD 5.:,, , / DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER , ASTT. REGISTRAR , INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT.