Shri Yogendrasinh C. Bakrola, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Surat

ITA 38/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8414 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RASESH SHAH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 38 /AHD/ 201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] ITA NO.38/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 YOGENDRASINH C. BAKROLA ... .. APPELLANT RAJPUT FALIA, SURAT. [PAN : AL APB 5294 Q ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(4), SURAT. .RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY : RASESH SHAH, FOR THE APPELLANT PRASOON KABRA , FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 05.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE O RDER : 22 . 0 9 .2017 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 24 TH OCTOBER, 2013, PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - I, SURAT, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( THE ACT HEREINAFTER ), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN PASSING ORDE R EX - PARTE. 2 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING RS. 19,05,040/ - ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. ITA NO . 38 /AHD/ 201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 PAGE 2 OF 3 3 ON THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING RS.4,74,958/ - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED INCOME NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. 4 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING RS . 19320 / - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED INCOME NOT DISCLOSED ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRACT RECE IPTS. 5 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING RS. 2,52,800 / - ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF EXPENSES. 6 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS . 2,59,183/ - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED NON AGRICULTURE INCOME. 7 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 31,1817 - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED LOW HOUSE HOLD WITHDRAWALS EXPENSES. 8 IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ABOVE ADDITIONS MAD E BY ASSESSING OFFICER AND CON FIRMED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT PERMISSION TO A R GUE T HE MATTER ON MERITS AND CONTENDED THA T ALTHOUGH IT IS AN EX - PATE ORDER AND THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM APPEAR ING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT ( A ) , LOOKING TO THE SMALLNESS OF THE ISSUE INVOLVED , IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE THAT THE MATTER IS DECIDED ON MERITS. WITHOUT PREJUDICE T O THIS S TAND, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (A) AS THE NOTICE OF HEARING COULD NOT BE COMMUNICATED TO HIM IN TIME. LEARNED COUNSEL FURTHER UNDERTAKE S T HA T IN THE E VENT OF MAT T ER BEING REMITTED TO THE LEARNED ITA NO . 38 /AHD/ 201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 PAGE 3 OF 3 CIT ( A ), HE WILL FULLY CO - OPERATE IN EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. HE THUS URGED US TO AT LEAST GRANT HIM ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PRESENTING HIS CASE. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT WHILE HE HAS NO OBJECTION IN REMITTING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT ( A ) BUT HE URGED T HIS TRIBUNAL NOT TO ADJOURN THIS MATTER. 4. HAVING HEA R D THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD , I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE , TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LEARNED C IT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION DENOVO AFTER GIVING YET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. I FURTHER DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FULLY CO - OPERATE WITH THE LEAR NED C IT(A) IN EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APP E AL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 22 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2017. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: AHMEDABAD, THE 22 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2017. PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL AHMEDA BAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD