Sh. Anand Aggarwal, Kalka V. ITO, Parwanoo

ITA 38/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7798 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, AM AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM ITA NO. 38 /CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 SHRI ANAND AGGARWAL V. I.T.O., PARWANOO SHOP NO. 1-D SECTOR 1, PARWANOO C/O PLOT NO. 56, HSIDC, I.A. KALKA PAN: ADMPA 5397 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. SAINI DATE OF HEARING: 16.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 19.04.2012 ORDER PER T.R. SOOD, A.M IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GRO UNDS. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT TH E ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED ON EX-PARTE BASIS U/S 144. EVEN IN THE FIRS T APPELLATE ORDER THE SAME ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED AND SOME HAVE BEEN CONF IRMED WITHOUT ANY DETAILED DISCUSSION. 3. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BECAUSE THERE W AS LOT OF FAMILY DISPUTES PARTICULARLY IN REGARD TO VARIOUS PROPERTIES. HE F URTHER ARGUED THE ISSUES ON MERITS. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE STRONG LY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, IT WAS PROPOSED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE O RDER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS PROPOSAL WAS ACCEP TED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THERE WAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION FROM TH E REVENUE SIDE. 2 ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE ALL THE ISSUES AGAIN AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 19 .04.2012 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 19 .04.2012 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/ THE DR