Mr. Gh. Mohd Ganaie, Srinagar V. The Income-tax Officer, Srinagar

ITA 5/ASR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6077 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 22-04-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 05(ASR)/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005-06 PAN NO: AAIFA1982D M/S GH. MOHD. GANAIE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VETHPORA, LASJAN, SRINAGAR, WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR, KASHMIR KASHMIR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. TARSEM LAL, DR DATE OF HEARING: 22.04.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22.04.2014 ORDER PER BENCH 1. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.09.2011 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A), JA MMU, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: I. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS WITH A PREDETERMINED SET OF MIN D BRUSHED ASIDE THE FACTS AND EVIDENCES PLACED ON RECORD, ON A WRONG PREMISE UPHELD THE PENALTY PARTLY ON RS. 5,48,450/- WITHOUT PROPER OPPORTUNITY, APART FROM BEING ERRONEOUS IS ILLEGAL ALSO. II. THAT THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITY BELOW WITHOUT PROPE R SERVICE OF NOTICE AND WRONG PRESENTATION OF FACTS, BASED ON CO NFUSION IS A NON-SPEAKING ORDER, AS SUCH IS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. III. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2 THEREFORE, IN THE PREMISES, IT IS PRAYED, THAT ORDE R OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BE QUASHED IN TOTALITY AND APPELLANT DECLARED NOT CHARGEABLE TO ANY PENALTY. 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY ARE NOT DISPUTED BY LEARNED DR; THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED TO REPEAT THE SAME. 3. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR TODAY I.E. 22.04.2014 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD. IN RESPONSE TO THE SA ME, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE APPEARED NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT BUT KEEPI NG IN VIEW THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AND THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN DIS PUTE EX- PARTE ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING LEARNED DR. 4. AFTER HEARING LEARNED DR AND PERUSING THE RELEVA NT RECORDS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS R AISED THE GROUND THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSE E. NO OTHER GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. AFTER PERUS ING THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSE E REMAINED NON-COOPERATIVE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS IN THE PENALTY PR OCEEDINGS AND SIMILARLY BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY. BUT 3 KEEPING IN VIEW THE PENALTY IN DISPUTE AND IN THE I NTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE TO THE L EARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER THE LAW AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSE E. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, AS INDICATED A BOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND APRIL, 2014 SD/./- SD/./- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 22 ND APRIL, 2014 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: M/S GH. MOHD. GANAIE, VETHPORA, LAS JAN, SRINAGAR, KASHMIR 2. ITO, WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR, KASHMIR 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT, 5. THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.