Rasmita Jena, Koraput V. ITO, Ward-1, Jeypore

ITA 358/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3878 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: L N SAHOO
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 358 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 - 10 RASMITAJENA, W/O RABINDRA KUMAR J ENA, AT: JELC SHOPPING COMPLEX JEYPORE, KORAPUT VS. ITO, WARD - 1, JEYPORE PAN/GIR NO. AGOPJ 7148 N (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI L.N.SAHOO, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 05 /04 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 /04 / 2017 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR, DATED 6.9.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE EX - PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE FIRST APPEAL ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THA T THE ADDITION OF RS.2,94,218.00 BY THE ID. A.O AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT AND ADDITION OF TH E SAME TO THE NET PROFIT DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE PROFIT & LOSS A/C IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW. 2 ITA NO. 358 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :200 9 - 10 3. THAT THE APPELLAN T HAVING INVESTED RS.2,94,218.00 IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. A.Y.2007 - 08, NON CONSIDERATION OF THE SAME BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT (APPEALS) IS ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE AND BAD IN LAW AND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADEQUA TE OPPORTUNITY FOR REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE FORUMS BELOW, WHICH IS IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 5. THAT THE OTHER GROUNDS IF ANY WILL BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL AND THE APPELLANT BE ALLOWED AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 27.9 .2016. THE REGISTRY ISSUED A DEFECT MEMO TO THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL FI LED IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 123 DAYS AND CONDONATION PETITION WAS FILED WITHOUT AF FIDAVIT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED AFFIDAVIT DATED 31.12.2016 TO SUPPORT THE CONDONATION PETITION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY, WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WAS RECEIVED ON 26.3.2016 BY THE ASSESSEE. AFTER RECEIPT OF THE ORDE R, THE ASS ESSEE WAS SUFFERING FROM LOWER B ACK PAIN AND AS SUCH COULD NOT MEET HER ADVOCATE FOR HANDING OVER THE APPEAL MEMO WITH ORIGINAL PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, FOR WHICH, LAST DATE OF FILING OF APPEAL WAS 25.5.2016. THE ASSESSEE RECOVERED FROM ILLNESS ON 18.6.2016 AND THEREAFTER THE APPEAL WAS FIL ED ON 15.8 .2016 AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS A DELAY OF 23 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL. 4. ON PERUSAL OF APPEAL PAPERS, I FIND THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 27.9.2016 AND NOT ON 15.8.2016 AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CONDONATION PETITION FILED. FURTHER, IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE APPEAL RECORDS 3 ITA NO. 358 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :200 9 - 10 THAT THE APPEAL FEE WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE ON 27.9.2016 AS EVIDENCED BY THE BANK C HALLAN OF STATE BANK OF INDIA , LINK ROAD, CUTTACK FOR RS.6068 / - PLACED ON RECORD. THUS, IT IS CONCLUSIVELY FOUND T HAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 27.9 .2 016 AND NOT ON 15.8 .2016. THUS \ , THE ASSESSEE HAS F AILED TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY OF 123 DAYS IN FILING OF APPE AL TO THE TRIBUNAL WITH COGENT AND PLAUSIBLE REASONS. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UN - ADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. . ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 /04 /201 7 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 05 /04 /2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : RASMITAJENA, W/O RABIND RA KUMAR JENA, AT: JELC SHOPPING COMPLEX JEYPORE, KORAPUT 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, WARD NO.1, JEYPORE 3. THE CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR. 4. PR.CIT - 1, BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//