Smt. Chandrakanta Choudhary, Indore V. The ACIT 1(2), Indore

ITA 506/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 70095 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH VAIDYA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 506/IND/2013 A.Y.2009-10 SMT. CHANDRAKANT CHOUDHARY, INDORE PAN AAYPC 9969 N :: APPELLANT VS ACIT-1(2), INDORE :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI MANISH VAIDYA REVENUE BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 1 9 .12.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 9 .12.2013 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER D ATED 13.3.2013 OF THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 2 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION AND THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) MAY VERY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE. 1.1 AS AN ALTERNATE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE IT IS PRAYED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) MAY VERY KIN DLY BE DIRECTED TO GIVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND PASS THE ORDER ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.37,12,900/- BY TREATING THE JEWELLERY AS UNACCOUNTED IS WRONG AND THE SAME MAY VERY KINDLY BE NOW DELETED. 2. DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD SHRI MANISH VAIDYA, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI R.A. VERMA, LD. SR. DR. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT NO OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND ADDITIONS HAVE WRONGLY BEEN MADE. ON THE OTHER HAND , LD. SR. DR DEFENDED THE ADDITIONS BY FURTHER SUBMITTING THAT T HE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WITHOUT GOING INTO MU CH DELIBERATION, WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) O F THE I.T. ACT 3 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 29.12.2010. HOWEVER, BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR DUE TO REASON ABLE CAUSE AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE REMAND THIS APPEAL TO THE F ILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE WITH FURTHER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCL USION OF THE HEARING ON 19.12.2013. SD/- SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 19.12.2013 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE !VYAS!