Shri Vikrambhai Dosalbhai Shau, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 3480/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8341 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

, . . , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIA L MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.3480/AHD/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) SHRI VIKRAMBHAI DOSALBHAI SAHU D-2, ARCHANA PARK OFF CG ROAD SWASTIK CHAR RASTA NAVRANGPURA AHMEDABAD- 380 009 / VS. THE ITO WARD-5(2)(4) AHMEDABAD % ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AGGPS 7834 Q ( %( / APPELLANT ) .. ( )%( / RESPONDENT ) %(* / APPELLANT BY : SMT. URVASHI SHODHAN, AR )%( +* / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAURABH SINGH, SR.DR ,- + / DATE OF HEARING 03/05/2018 ./01 + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17/05/2018 / O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: BEING AGGRIEVED BY AND/OR DISSATISFIED WITH THE ORD ER DATED 03.10.2016 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AHMEDABAD-5 PASSED IN APPEAL NO.CITA-5/ITO.WD.5(2)( 4)/145/2015-16 CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.43,50,000/- UNDER SEC TION 68 OF THE INCOME ITA NO.3480/AHD /2016 VIKRAMBHAI DOSALBHAI SHAU VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2012-13 - 2 - TAX ACT UNDER ORDER DATED 23.03.2015 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE US BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE MATTER, THE LEARN ED ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER (AO) HAS PASSED THE ORDER EX-PARTE ADDING AN AMOUNT OF RS.43 ,50,000/- UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION BEFORE TH E LEARNED CIT(A) STATING THE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE AO AND ALSO MADE A REQUEST TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAIL S/INFORMATION RELATING TO THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE CONCERNED BANK. HOWEV ER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER IMPUGNED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATIVE FOR EITHER OF THE PARTIES. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE L EARNED AR. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO EVIDENCE, WHATSOEVER WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO, HE THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSELS APPEARING FOR TH E PARTIES. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RE CORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT APPE ARS FROM THE RECORDS THAT NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 142(1) ITA NO.3480/AHD /2016 VIKRAMBHAI DOSALBHAI SHAU VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2012-13 - 3 - OF THE ACT ALONG WITH ANNEXURES IN THE FORM OF THE DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRES UPON WHICH THE ASSESSEE FILED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION. HOWEVER, ULTIMATELY THE AO PASSED THE FINAL ORDER OF ASSESSMENT EX-PART E IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DULY NARRATED THE REASON FOR NON-APPEA RANCES BEFORE THE AO IN THE FORM OF A WRITTEN SUBMISSION WITH THE FURTHE R REQUEST TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS/DETAILS/ INFORMATION RELATING TO THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE CONCERNED BANK. IT APPEARS FROM THE ORDER IMPUGNED PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) THAT NO DELIBERATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CIT(A) ON THIS ASPECT AND ULTIMATE LY THE LEARNED CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER EX-PARTE CONFIRMING THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE AO WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON WHATSOEVER WITHOUT AFF ORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. AN APPLICAT ION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ON RECORD BE FORE US. 3.1. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE ENTIRE ASPECT OF THE MATTER, WE FIND THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY THE A SSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO EXPLAIN THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE HIM. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ARE INC LINED TO REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION UPO N HIM TO DECIDE THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, IF ANY, UPON GIVING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ITA NO.3480/AHD /2016 VIKRAMBHAI DOSALBHAI SHAU VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2012-13 - 4 - ASSESSEE. IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESS EE SHOULD COOPERATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AS AND WHEN CALLED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17/05/2018 SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) ( PRADIPKUMAR KEDIA ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 17/ 05 /2018 5 ..,,. ,../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. %( / THE APPELLANT 2. )%( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 67 8 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 8 ( ) / THE CIT(A), AHMEDABAD-5 5. 9:; ,7 , 7 1 , 6 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ;=>- / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, )9 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 14.5.18 (DICTATION-PAD 6- PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS APPEAL-FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 14.5.18 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR