Sh.Hardev Singh S/o Sucha Singh, Ludhiana V. The Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana

ITA 359/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9072 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGHDR
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 359/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI HARDEV SINGH, VS THE ITO, S/O SUCHA SINGH, WARD II, R/O VILLAGE RORIAN, KHANNA. TEHSIL PAYAL, DISTRICT LUDHIANA. PAN: AUTPS0530N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUBHASH AGGARW AL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH,DR DATE OF HEARING : 03.10.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.10.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2, LUDHIANA DATED 27.01.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,60,134/-. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT IT IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY TH E LD. CIT(APPEALS). HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(AP PEALS) IGNORED THAT THE APPEAL OF SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH, BRO THER OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI HARDEV SINGH, ASSESSEE WERE H EARD TOGETHER AND DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE IN THE CASE OF SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN IN TO 2 CONSIDERATION BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WHILE PASSING THE EX-PARTE ORDER. 3. IN THIS CASE, SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH IS ONE OF THE CO- OWNERS AND HIS APPEAL IS STILL PENDING BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THEREFORE, MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDE RATION AT THE LEVEL OF LD. CIT(APPEALS). ON THE OTHER HAND , LD. DR RELIED UPON ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, I AM OF THE VIEW MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE LE VEL OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT T HE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH PARAMETERS OF SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDING TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, BOTH THESE CASES WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE IN THE CASE OF SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY TH E LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND ACCORDING TO HIM, THE APPEAL OF SH RI PARAMJIT SINGH IS STILL PENDING BEFORE LD. CIT(APPE ALS). THESE FACTS, THEREFORE, CLEARLY MAKE OUT A CASE THA T LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHOULD HAVE DECIDED BOTH THE MATTERS TOGETHER AND SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED DETAILED SUBMISSIONS FILED IN THE CASE OF SHRI PARAMJIT SING H. 5. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, I SET ASIDE THE IMPU GNED ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER IN ISSUE TO THE FILE O F LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2 LUDHIANA WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TOGETHER WITH THE APPEAL OF OTHER 3 CO-OWNER SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH AND SHALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSIONS FILED IN DETAIL IN BO TH THE CASES. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHALL GIVE REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 3 RD OCTOBER,2016. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD