Shri Deepak Gurunath Gojagekar, Belagavi V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Belagavi

ITA 435/PAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3481 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRA BHAT JHA
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI, BENCH PANAJI , , BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM ITA NO. 434 &435 /PAN/201 8 (AY: 201 5 - 201 6 & 2014 - 2015 ) SHRI DEEPAK, S/O GURUNATH GOJAGEKAR, PROPRIETOR : M/S DEEPAK CONSTRUCTION, 508 - C, NIWARA APARTMENTS, NEAR II RAILWAY GATE, HINDU NAGAR, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA - 590006 PAN : A A PPG 4153 P VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), BELAGAVI ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI OMKAR GODBOLE, CA /REVENUE BY : SHRI PRABHAT JHA, CIT DR / DATE OF HEARING : 0 4 /1 0 /202 1 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 4 /10 /202 1 / O R D E R PER BENCH : TH ESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 16.08.2018 , PASSED BY THE CIT (A) , BELAGAVI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 5 - 201 6 . COMMON GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN BOTH THE APPEALS. THEREFORE, FOR T HE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y.2015 - 2016 SHALL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR DECIDING BOTH THE APPEALS. THE SERIAL NUMBER OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED SEPARATELY FOR THE A.Y.2015 - 2016 BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH FORM NO.36 STARTS FROM 9 TO 13, WHICH READS AS UNDER : - 9. T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT CONTAINS MATERIAL CONTRADICTION IN THE FORM OF CONTRADICTING OPINIONS. 10. T HE AMOUNT OF RS.51,00,000/ - IS DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT WITH SUFFICI ENT EXPLANATION AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 11. NO REASON WHATSOEVER IS GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT FOR REJECTING THE SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION PROVIDED BY THE APPELLANT. HENCE, ITA NOS.434&435/PAN/2018 2 ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT IS A NON - SPEAKING ORDER. A NON - SPEAKING ORDER IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED AND UNTENABLE IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. 12. SECTION 115BBE AS AMENDED WITH EFFECT FROM 01/04/2017 CANNOT BE APPLIED RETROSPECTIVELY. HENCE, DISALLOWANCE OF SET OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.3,25,860/ - AGAINST THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME IS UNJUSTIFIED AND UNTENABLE. 13. THE LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORITY OUGHT TO HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. BUT IT HAS DISMISSED ON MERITS WITHOUT HEARING THE APPELLANT. THE SAME IS BAD IN LAW AND REQUIRES INTERFERENCE BY THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL. 2. THIS IS STAY GRANTED MATTER. IN BOTH THE APPEALS, AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) WHEREIN THE CIT(A) HAD PASSED THE ORDER GIVING APPEAL EFFECT AT PARA 4 OF PAGE 2 OF THE ORDER. IT WAS FAIRLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE SATISFIED IF THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AND THE OPPORTUNITY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTS AND MAKE SUBMISSION BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN SUPPORT OF HIS CASE. 3. PER CONTRA , LEARNED DR HAS NO OBJECTION FOR REMANDING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE PARAGRAPH 4 AT P AGE 2 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT AFTER ISSUING NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) HAD PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO AGITATE AND ARGUE THE MATTER BEFORE HIM. IN OUR CONSIDERED OP INION IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE CIT(A) TO GIVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR AND ARGUE THE MATTER BEFORE HIM. ACCORDINGLY, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION OF ALL THE ITA NOS.434&435/PAN/2018 3 GROUNDS R AISED BY THE ASSESSEE AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PRODUCE ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS OR EVIDENCE AS MAY BE PERMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR THE JURISDICTION OF THE APPEAL. THE CIT(A) SHALL GRANT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND DECI DE THE MATTER BY PASSING A REASONED SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED I N THE OPEN COURT ON 04 / 10 / 2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( ) (DR. M ITHA LAL MEENA ) ( ) (LALIET KUMAR) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER /PANAJI ; DATED 04/10 /202 1 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA, SR.P.S. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) , /ITAT, PANAJI 1. / THE APPELLANT - SHRI DEEPAK, S/O GURUNATH GOJAGEKAR, PROPRIETOR : M/S DEEPAK CONSTRUCTION, 508 - C, NIWARA APARTMENTS, NEAR II RAILWAY GATE, HINDU NA GAR, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA - 590006 2. / THE RESPONDENT - ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), BELAGAVI 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, PANJAJI 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//