SHRI DEVI DATTA, AMRITSAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (1), AMRITSAR

ITA 503/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0978 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 503/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Devi Datta, 2nd Floor, Swaran Complex, Shashtri Market, Amritsar [PAN: AAPPD 3630E] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Amritsar (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. J.P. Bhatia & Piyush Bhatia, Advs. Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 29.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 13.10.2022 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.06.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Amritsar, in respect of Assessment Year 2010-11, challenging therein that ITA No. 503/Asr/2018 Devi Datta v. ITO 2 the impugned order was bad in law as no proper notice was sent on the address of the assessee. 2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee by not allowing the appellant assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard, and that he has confirmed the addition of Rs.5,01,396/- ignoring the fact that the appellant was second holder of the investment in mutual fund as evident Form 26AS. The counsel has filed any application under rule 29 of ITAT rules for admission of additional evidence dated 23rd September, 2022 stating therein details of the investment in mutual fund [APB pg. no. 1] along with bank statement. He requested that the matter may be remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter after considering the facts of the case on merits. 3. The ld. DR stands by the impugned order, however he has no objection to the request of the appellant assessee. 4. Heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee by confirming the addition of Rs.5,01,396/- on account of ITA No. 503/Asr/2018 Devi Datta v. ITO 3 investment in mutual fund made by the Assessing Officer by passing ex-parte order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. 5. It is evident from the record that both the authorities have passed ex-parte order qua the assessee without taking any rebuttal of the assessee on record regarding the addition made on account of investment in mutual fund. In our view, an addition made without granting opportunity of hearing to the assessee on the proposed additions is tantamount to gross violation of principle of natural justice. We understand that the additional evidence filed by the ld. AR have material bearing on the issue which is required to be considered by the ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating the issue under consideration in the interest of justice. Accordingly, we are of the view, that it is a fit case to be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue of investment in the mutual fund by the assessee afresh after considering the additional evidence filed on record [APB pg. nos. 1 to 16]. The ld. CIT(A) shall grant adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 503/Asr/2018 Devi Datta v. ITO 4 Order pronounced in the open court on 13.10.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr/PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order