Shri Umed Singh, Chandigarh V. ITO, W-4(1), Chandigarh

ITA 499/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9997 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRA KANTA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 69A; 37; 144; 2

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, B CHANDIGARH , ! '# $ % & '# , () BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 499/CHD/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI UMED SINGLH, C/O CA RUPESH NAGPAL, HOUSE NO. 1459,SECSTOR 40-B, CHANDIGARH THE ITO, WARD-4(1), CHANDIGARH ./PAN NO: AWJPS1309K / APPELLANT /RESPONDENT ! /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL, CA ' ! / REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA, SR. DR # $ % /DATE OF HEARING : 17.12.2019 &'() % / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.12.2019 (*/ ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 4.10.2018 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT (A) ]. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT THE WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE FRAMING OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 2 UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT WHICH IS ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2. THAT THE ORDER OF THE WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF LAW AND NATURAL JUSTICE AS THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE CAUSE TO PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING EITHER IN PERSON OR THROUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND EVEN APPELLATE ORDER HAS NOT BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH ON FILING THE REQUEST FOR THE SAME. 3. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF NON- REPRESENTATION & NON-COOPERATION BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO APPELLANT FOR ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS AND ENTIRE ORDER DESERVED TO BE QUASHED. 4. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE LD. A.O. IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDIN G THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,62,28,200/- MADE BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER BY TREATING CASH DEPOSITS/CASH CREDITS AS UNEXPLAINED MONEY U/S 69A OF THE ACT AS THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF LEGAL AND GENUINE SOURCES. ADDITION CONFIRMED IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW AND THE ENTIRE ORDER DESERVED TO BE QUASHED. 5. THAT ON LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE LD. A.O. IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDIN G THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,00,000/- MADE BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER BY TREATING PURCHASE OF MUTUAL FUNDS AS UNEXPLAINED MONEY U/S 69A OF THE ACT AS THE PURCHASE WAS MADE OUT OF EXPLAINED AND GENUINE ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 3 SOURCES. ADDITION CONFIRMED IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED AND ALSO BAD IN LAW. 6. THAT THE APPELLANT WAS FRAMED IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND WAS IN NO STATE OF MIND TO ATTEND THE ASSESSMENT/ APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. 7. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CASE, THE ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL PASSED BY WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH DESERVES TO BE DELETED AS THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE ( AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM) WERE TOTALLY NEGLECTED WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF TH E APPELLANT. 8. THAT THE ORDER OF THE WORTHY CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH S ERRONEOUS, ARBITRARY, OPPOSED TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE AND IS, THUS, UNTENABLE. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR ANY ADDITION, DELETION OR AMENDMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 9. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR ANY ADDITION , DELETION OR AMENDMENT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAME. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS CASE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 26.12.2017 PA SSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ORDER DATED 4.10.2018 BY THE LD. CIT(A) ARE EX-PARTE ORDERS. THAT ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUF FICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. FURTH ER, THE NON- APPEARANCE WAS TOTALLY UNINTENTIONAL AND WAS BONAF IDE. IN SUPPORT OF THE AVERMENTS MADE, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E IN THIS RESPECT HAS SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI UMED SI NGH DATED ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 4 15.12.2019 DULY NOTARIZED, THE CONTENTS OF WHICH AR E REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- AFFIDAVIT I, UMED SINGH, S/O SHRI. BHANWAR SINGH, H. NO. 1099 , II FLOOR, SECTOR 37 B, CHAND GARH DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY AFFIRM AND DECLARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT I AM A PERMANENT RESIDENT OF H. NO. 1099, II FLOOR, SECTOR 37 B,CHANDIGARH. 2. THAT I AM A REGULAR INCOME TAX ASSESSEE WITH ITO, W ARD 4(1), CHANDIGARH AND MY PAN NUMBER IS AWJPS1309K. 3. THAT INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT FOR MY CASE FOR AY 2010- 11 WAS CONCLUDED BY LD. ITO, WARD 4(1), CHANDIGARH VIDE ORDER DD. 26.12.2017 WHERE AGAIN APPEAL WAS FILED BEF ORE THE WORTHY CIT(A) ON 27.01.2018 AND ORDER U/S 250(6) WAS PASSED BY THE WORTHY CIT (A) ON 04.10.2018. 4. THAT AGAINST THE ORDER OF WORTHY CIT(A) U/S 250(6) DD. 04.10.2018, I FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT, CHANDIGARH ON 18.04.2019. 5. THAT THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE WORTHY CIT(A) WAS PASSE D EX-PARTE. 6. THAT AS REGARDS THE REASON FOR MY NON-APPEARANCE BE FORE THE WORTHY CIT(A), IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE FIXI NG THE DATE OF HEARING HAD NOT BEEN SERVED UPON ME. IT IS THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED FOR FIXATION OF HEARING WAS NEVER HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY ME AND IT WAS DUE T O SUCH UNAWARENESS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS COULD NOT BE A TTENDED AND HENCE THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR MY NON- APPEARANCE. 7. THAT THE REASON FOR NON-PARTICIPATION BEFORE THE LEARNED ITO WARD 4(1), CHANDIGARH WAS THAT DUE TO MAJOR DOWNFALL IN MY BUSINESS RESULTING INTO HUGE LOSSES AND I WAS ALMOST BANKRUPT. MY ENTIRE TIME WAS INVOLVED I N HANDLING CREDITORS AND THEIR COERCIVE ACTIONS. FURT HER, THERE WERE SOME FALSE CHEQUES BOUNCING CASES LODGED AGAIN ST ME. DUE TO THIS FIR WAS FILED AGAINST ME BY AND I GOT A RRESTED AND KEPT IN ROHINI JAIL. DUE TO SUCH INCIDENTS, I W AS ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 5 UNDERGOING ACUTE DEPRESSION. DUE TO THIS I WAS UNAB LE TO FILE THE INFORMATION/ DOCUMENTS/EXPLANATION TO THE CONCE RNED ASSESSING OFFICER AS I COULD NOT MANAGE MYSELF BECA USE OF ACUTE DEPRESSING STATE OF MIND NEITHER I WAS ABLE T O PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS OR APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R. 7. THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY THE WO RTHY CIT(A), EX-PARTE WITHOUT DECISION ON MERITS. 8. THAT IT WAS NOT THAT I WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSEC UTING THE APPEAL. MY NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE WORTHY CIT (A) WAS TOTALLY UNINTENTIONAL AND WASBONAFIDE. I DESERVE T O BE HEARD ON MERITS OF THE CASE AND I UNDERTAKE TO CO OPERATE FULLY TOWARDS EARLY DISPOSAL OF THIS MATTER . SD/- DEPONENT PLACE: CHANDIGARH DATE 15-12-2019 VERIFICATION I, UMED SINGH S/O SHRI. BHANWAR SINGH DO HEREBY VER IFY THAT WHAT IS STATED ABOVE IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BES T OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AND THAT NOTHING HAS BEEN CONC EALED THEREIN. SD/- DEPONENT PLACE: CHANDIGARH DATE 15-12-2019 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A FAIR CASE ON MERITS. THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A). 5. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS SUPPORTED TH E ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 6 6. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 15.12.2 019 FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY EXPLAINED THE R EASONS FOR NON- APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFI CER. KEEPING IN VIEW THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE, WHICH ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 15.12.201 9 AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIV EN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL PROMPT LY APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS AND WHEN CALLED FOR AND NOT T O CONTRIBUTE IN ANY MANNER IN DELAYING THE PROCEEDINGS. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.12.2019. SD/- SD/- ( $ % & '# / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) () / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( / SANJAY GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17.12.2019 .. '+ ,-.- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. # / / CIT 4. # / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , %2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 157$ / GUARD FILE ITA NO. 499-CHD/2019- SHRI UMED SINGH, CHANDIGARH 7 '+ # / BY ORDER, 8' / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR