M/s. B.V. Textiles, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(1), Surat

ITA 424/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 42420514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 29-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.424 / AHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) M/S. B.V. TEXTILES, VS. ITO, WARD 6(1), 6/472, MANCHARPURA, SURAT KHARADI SHERI, SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : AACFB6365K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI HARDIK VORA, AR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI O P BATHEJA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 29.03.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27. 04.2012 O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A) IV, SURAT DATED 26.11.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDIT ION OF RS. RS.27,75,000/- AS ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CREDITS U/S. 68 OF THE ACT.. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED IN THE COURSE OF APPE LLATE PROCEEDINGS. 3. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ABOVE ADDITIO N/DISALLOWANCE MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY CIT (APP EALS) MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. I.T.A.NO. 424 /AHD/2010 2 2. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED BY THE A.O. TO FILE THE REQUIRED EVIDE NCE AND, THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ADMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. H E FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 3. AS AGAINST THIS, THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDE R OF LD. CIT(A) AND HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT A CLEAR FINDING IS GIVEN BY LD. CIT(A) THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS PROVIDED BY THE A.O. AND THERE WAS NON COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON AS ENUMERATED UNDER RULE 46A FOR ADMITTING A DDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT IT IS NOTED BY THE A.O. ON PA GE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT IN RESPECT OF THESE FOUR LOAN CREDITORS OF RS.27.57 LACS, ASSESSEE WAS ASKED VIDE LETTER DATED 13.10.2008 TO SHOW CRED ITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THESE DEPOSITORS WITH SUPPORTING EVI DENCE AND HE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THESE PARTIES FOR VERIFICAT ION. BUT IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ONLY CONFIRMATION OF THESE P ARTIES WITHOUT ADDRESS, BANK STATEMENT AND COPIES OF RETURN OF INCOME. BEF ORE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE REQUIRED DET AILS COULD NOT BE FILED AS THE SAME WERE RECEIVED FROM THE DEPOSITORS ONLY AFTER COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT BUT THIS ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WA S HELD TO BE NOT ACCEPTABLE BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT INDICATING ANY BASIS FOR THE SAME. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FEEL THAT THE ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSES BEFORE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADM ITTED AND HENCE, WE ADMIT THE SAME AND RESTORE THE ENTIRE MATTER BACK T O THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER CONSIDERING ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM AND IF REQUIRE D, AFTER OBTAINING REMAND REPORT FORM THE A.O. IN RESPECT OF THOSE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE. IN I.T.A.NO. 424 /AHD/2010 3 VIEW OF OUR ABOVE DECISION WE DO NOT MAKE ANY COMME NT ON THE MERIT OF THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. AND CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US BY WAY OF RAISIN G GROUND NO.1. LD. CIT(A) IS AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER LAW AFTER CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFOR E HIM AND AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BO TH THE SIDES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE M ENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD./- SD./- (KUL BHARAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BY ORDER 6. THE GUARD FILE AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION19/4 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER23/4.OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P .S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 27/4 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.27/4 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 2 7/4 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER. .