Shri. Arun Jagadale, Bijapur V. ITO, Bijapur

ITA 359/BANG/2006

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5383 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 01-05-2006
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GAYATHRI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 54B

Judgement Text

ITA NOS.359 & 361/BANG/2006 PAG E - 1 IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI. GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. I.T.A.NO.359/BANG/2006 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03) 2. I.T.A.NO.361/BANG/2006 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03) 1. LATE SRI. EKNATH C. JAGADALE, L/R. ARUN JADADALE, DHOBALE GALLI, BIJAPUR 2. SHRI. ANANT C. JAGADALE, DHOBALE GALLI, UPALI BURUZ ROAD, BIJAPUR .. APPELLANT V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, BIJAPUR .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SMT. GAYATHRI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JACINT ZINIK VASHAI, ADDITIONA L CIT O R D E R PER DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT : THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES FOR T HE COMMON ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-02. THE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) , AT BELGA UM, DATED.12.1.2006 ITA NOS.359 & 361/BANG/2006 PAG E - 2 AND ARISE OUT OF ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED U/S.143(3) R .W.S.147 OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 2. IN BOTH THE CASES, THE COMMON GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THAT THE PROCEEDINGS U/S.147 WERE WITHOUT JURISDICT ION AND ALTERNATIVELY THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 54B SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN T O THE ASSESSEES. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, MS. GAYATHRI, ADVOCATE, SOUGHT LEAVE OF THE COURT TO FILE AN ADDITIONAL GROUND EXPLAINING THAT THE CAPITAL GAINS IN THESE CASES WOULD NOT BE TAXABLE IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSME NT YEAR 2002-03. ON GOING THROUGH THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THESE CASES, WE FIND THAT THE SAID SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL HAS MUCH FOR CE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT REQUIRES VERIFICATION OF FACTS AND APPLICA TION OF MIND. THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT FORMALLY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, REMIT BACK THESE A PPEALS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECONSIDER THE ISSUE AND REDO THE ASSESS MENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS FURTHER DIRECTE D TO CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL GROUND NOW SOUGHT TO BE RAISED BY THE CO UNSEL AS WELL. THEREFORE, THESE TWO CASES WILL BE DECIDED DENOVO A FTER CONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS INCLUDING ADDITIONAL CONTENTIONS/GROUND S OF THE ASSESSEES, AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEES DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ITA NOS.359 & 361/BANG/2006 PAG E - 3 4. IN RESULT, THESE FILES ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE APPEALS ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. MONDAY, THE 26TH APRIL, 2010. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) (DR. O. K. NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MCN* COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A) 5. DR 6. GF, ITAT, NEW DELHI 7. GF, ITAT, BANGALORE BY ORDER ASST.REGISTRAR ITAT BANGALORE