Sh. Prem Singh Chankrola, Chandigarh V. ITO, W-5(1), Chandigarh

ITA 456/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1586 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 456/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SH. PREM SINGH CHANKROLA, VS. THE ITO, WARD-5(1), SCF-30, SECTOR 26, CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AANFP8361N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, C A RESPONDENT BY : SMT.CHANDERKANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 31.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.12.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX(A)-2, CHANDIGARH [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE WORTHY CIT(A) THROUGH HIS ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 HAS ERRED IN PASSING THAT ORDER IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO ITA NO. 456-C-2018 M/S PREM SINGH CHANKROLA, CHANDIGARH 2 WHEREIN HE HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 8,40,362/- ON ACCOUNT OF CARRIAGE AND FREIGHT EXPENSES BEING ALLEGEDLY UNVOUCHED. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO WHEREIN HE HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 2,01,175/- (50% OF TOTAL EXPENSES) ON ACCOUNT OF REBATE AND DISCOUNT BEING ALLEGEDLY UNVOUCHED. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE WORTHY CIT(A) WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO WHEREIN HE HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 2,53,220/- ON ACCOUNT OF BOX EXPENSES BEING ALLEGEDLY UNVOUCHED. 5. THAT ON THE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY WORTHY CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE QUASHED SINCE HE HAS PASSED A TOTALLY NON-SPEAKING ORDER. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CIT(A) AND HAS STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT APPLIED HIS INDEPENDENT MIND TO ANY OF THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEF ORE THE CIT(A). THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS JUST REPRODUCED THE ENTIRE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HAS THEREAFTER CONCLUDED THAT HE HAD PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THAT THE SAM E WAS REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER. HE ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ITA NO. 456-C-2018 M/S PREM SINGH CHANKROLA, CHANDIGARH 3 5. WE FIND FORCE IN THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CI T(A) REVEALS THAT THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS APPEAL BEF ORE THE CIT(A) HAVE NOT BEEN SEPARATELY DISCUSSED AND NO INDEPENDENT F INDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON ANY OF THE ISSUES. IN VI EW OF THIS, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE M ATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER ON EACH OF THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE HIM BY THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT L D. CIT(A) WILL GIVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY TREATED AS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.09.2018 SD/- SD/- (B.R.R KUMAR) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 04.09.2018 RKK COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT THE CIT(A) THE DR