M/s Kalaptaru Krishi Kendra, Barnala V. ITO, Barnala

ITA 410/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5422 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.410 /CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) KALAPTARU KRISHI KENDRA, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFI CER, SAHARANPUR, H.O.DHANAULA ROAD, BARNALA. BARNALA. PAN: AAGFK4129E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI JASPAL SHARMA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI, DR O R D E R THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), DATED 23.12.2010 RELATING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL : 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AN D IGNORING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND IT IS PRAYED THAT ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE AND APPROPRIATE RELIEF MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.25000/- MADE BY LD. A.O. ON ADHOC BASIS IN THE JEEP & TELEPHONE EXPENSES FOR POSSIBLE PERSONAL USE AND IT IS PRAYED 2 THAT APPROPRIATE RELIEF MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE A SUM OF RS.37000/- @ 10% MADE BY THE LD. A.O. ON ADHOC BASIS, OF SUM OF TOTAL OF 8 HEADS OF EXPENSES TO COVER UP POSSIBL E LEAKAGE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES HAVING NOT BEEN FULLY VOUCHED AND IT IS PRAYED THAT APPROPRIATE RELIEF MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.200000/- MADE BY LD. A.O. ON ADHOC BASIS AGAINST INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO SISTER CONCERNS AND IT IS PRAYED THAT APPROPRIATE RELIEF MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED. 5. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), PATIALA HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.20000/- MADE BY LD. A.O. ON ADHOC BASIS IN RESPECT OF SPARE PART S TO COVER UP POSSIBLE LEAKAGE DUE TO ABSENCE OF STOC K REGISTER AND IT IS PRAYED THAT APPROPRIATE RELIEF M AY KINDLY BE GRANTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE HAD FILED AN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADJOURNED DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) HAS FAI LED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT ADJUDICATING CONFIRMED THE SAME. 4. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE LAST DATE OF 3 HEARING. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D FURNISHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE C IT(A). 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE C IT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OR HIS COUNSEL ON TH E RELEVANT DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE O N MERITS OF THE ADDITION AND SUMMARILY CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT THE CIT(A) IS TO PASS THE ORDER IN WRITING STATING THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE SAID DECISION. THE SAID PROPOSITIONS OF LAW ARE BOUND TO BE FOLLOW ED BY THE CIT(A) EVEN WHEN THE ORDER IS MADE EX-PARTE THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW THEREOF, I SET ASIDE THE PRESENT ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND RE STORE THE SAME TO HIS FILE TO DECIDE DENOVO THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE. A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASS ESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE VIGILANT AND APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DAY OF MAY, 2011. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30 TH MAY, 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4