Shri K. Venkata Rao, Hyderabad V. The ITO Ward -4(3), Hyderabad

ITA 454/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53687 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R LAXMAN
• Assessee Lawyers: CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.454/HYD/2011 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-0 8 SHRI K.VENKATA RAO, HYDERABAD (PAN AFPQK 6555 F) V/S. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(3), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI CHAITANYA KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.LAXMAN DATE OF HEARING 20.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 4.10.2011 O R D E R PER G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2007-08 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS). 2. GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL READ AS UNDER- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IS ERRONE OUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DISPOSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLA NT HEREIN. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT EXPARTE UNDER SEC.144 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.454/H/2011 SHRI K.VENKATA RAO, HYDERABAD 2 4. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.23,26,600, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ALL THE DEPOSITS MADE BY THE APPELLANT ARE EXPLAINABLE BY T HE APPELLANT HEREIN. 5. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.1 ,25,900 UNDER THE HEAD UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE IN ACQUISITI ON OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER. THE ASSESSEE HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED BY HIM AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING O FFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER S.144 OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT PASSED ANY ELABORATE SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES RAISED BEFOR E HIM. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT SHALL BE IN THE INTERESTS OF JUST ICE TO SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FO R PASSING A DE-NOVO ASSESSMENT ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMIT TED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BE FORE THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND T HE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE UNDER S.143(2) SER VED ON HIM. FURTHER, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES BEFORE HIM. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RECORDED IN THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE POSTING NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASS ESSEE, THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.454/H/2011 SHRI K.VENKATA RAO, HYDERABAD 3 HAS APPEARED BEFORE HIM AND THE CASE WAS DISCUSSED. HE HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AFTER DISCUSSING THE CASE WITH THE A SSESSEE AND GOING THROUGH THE INFORMATION GATHERED, THE ASSESSMENT F OR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS BEING COMPLETED. IN THESE FAC TS, SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HIMSELF RECORDED IN THE ASSES SMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS APPEARED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE HIM AND THE CASE WAS DISCUSSED, WE FIND THAT THERE WAS NO ADEQUATE JUSTIFICATION FOR FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER S. 144 OF THE ACT. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT S HALL BE IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND T HE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO FRAME A DE-NOVO ASSESSMENT ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AF TER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO CO-OPERARTE WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN THE MATTER OF FINALIZATION OF ITS ASSESSMENT . W E DIRECT ACCORD INGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 4.10.2011 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) ( G.C. G UPTA) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER V ICE PRESIDENT DATED 4 TH OCTOBER, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: ITA NO.454/H/2011 SHRI K.VENKATA RAO, HYDERABAD 4 1. SHRI K.VENKATA RAO, C/O. SHRI S.RAMA RAO, FLAT NO.102, SHIRYA'S ELEGANCE, NO.3-6-643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500029 2. INCOME - TAX OFFICER , WARD 4(3), HYDERABAD 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) V HYDERABAD 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IV, HYDERABAD 5. THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S