Antati Ramulu, Suryapet V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Suryapet

ITA 516/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0502 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAVITRAN KUMAR
• Section: 40A(3); 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 516/HYD/2018 AY: 2009 - 10 ANTATI RAMULU, SURYAPET. PAN: AIYPA 2655 H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, SURYAPET. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: NONE REVENUE BY: SHRI PAVITRAN KUMAR, DR DATE OF HEARING: 13/07/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15 /07/2021 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO.0752/ITO - W - 1/SYP/CIT(A) - 3/16 - 17, DATED 03/10/2017 PASSED U/S. 144 R.W.S 254 AND U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2009 - 10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED F IVE GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL AND THEY ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DECIDING THE APPEAL EX - PARTE AND OUGHT TO HAVE PROVIDED FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE GROUND THAT THE A.O. ERRED IN MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS. 2 A. EXCESS VALUE OF THE GOLD JEWELLERY AS ARRIVED AT BY A.O. RS. 72,09,030/ - . B. EXCESS VALUE OF SILVER FOUND AT THE TIME OF SURVEY RS. 11,77,200. C. CASH FOUND AT THE TIME OF SURVEY RS. 13,352/ - . D. COST OF METAL MIXED SILVER RS. 6,75,770/ - . E. PROFIT ON SALE OF SILVER ARTICLES PURCHASES FROM HIRIM JEWELLERS RS. 4,24,000. F. ALLEGED UNRECORDED GOLD SALE RS. 68,170. G. ALLEGED UNCORDE D SILVER SALES RS. 12,597. H. SALES OF GOLD AND SILVER ITEMS NOT RECORDED IN BOOKS RS. 29,55,844. I. UNACCOUNTED GOLD SALES OF RS. 65,875/ - . 4. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE GROUND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) WERE NOT CORRECTLY AP PLIED AND THE A.O. IS NOT CORRECT IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 10,74,350/ - . 5. ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3 . BEFORE US NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES, WE FIND THAT THE LD. A.O. HAD PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER U/S. 144 R.W.S 254 OF THE ACT. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO DISMISSE D THE APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE WERE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD . A.O. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD . LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO OUR PROPOSITION AND ARGUED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR E VEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AT THE TIME OF HEARING . HENCE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDERS 3 BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. 4 . ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE MATERIALS PLACED ON RECORD , WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) AND THE LD. A.O. HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD.AO AS WELL AS B EFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . MOREOVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, THE LD. REVENUE AUT HORITIES WERE LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDERS AND ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE ENTIRE MATTE R BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. A.O IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, WE ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITI ES IN THEIR PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 4 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 15 TH JULY , 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 15 TH JULY , 2021 OKK COPY TO: - 1) ANTATI RAMULU, 1 - 6 - 141/9/2/8/3/A, ROAD NO.3, SRI VIDYANAGAR, SURYAPET. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, SRI KRISHNA NAGAR, SURYA. 3) THE CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD. 4) THE PR. CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE