CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR, TIGER PROJECT, SIRISKA, ALWAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD, ALWAR

ITA 554/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5970 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRAVAN KUMAR GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; TDS
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,A JAIPUR JH LAANHI XKSLKBZ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 554, 555, 760, 761,762, 763, 764, 765/JP/2 019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10, 2010-11 2011-12, 2012-1 3, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR TIGER PROJECT, SARISKA ALWAR CUKE VS. THE ITO TDS ALWAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAALC1579 N VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHRAVAN KUMAR GUPTA , ADVOCATE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDER SINGH, (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 03/10/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03/10/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BENCH THE PRESENT APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST DIFFERENT DATES ORDERS OF CIT(A), ALWAR FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2016-17 RAISING VARIOUS GROUNDS IN THE RESP ECTIVE APPEALS 2.1 AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAD DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSES SEE UNDER RULE 29OF THE ITA NO. 554/JP/2019 CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR VS ITO T DS, ALWAR 2 INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES.1963. THE REL EVANT CONTENTS OF THE APPLICATION ARE AS UNDER:- SUB: PRAYER FOR ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE U/R 29 OF ITAT SIRS, IN REFERENCE TO ABOVE IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE A BOVE MATTER THE ASSESSMENTS U/S 201(1)/201(1A) FOR A.Y. 2009-10 TO 2016-17 ON DIFFERENT DATE WERE PASSED BY THE ITO WARD TDS A LWAR FOR ALLEGED DEFAULT U/S 194C AND HUGE DEMAND HAS BEEN R AISED IN ALL YEARS. AND THE ORDERS HAVE ALSO BEEN PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) ALWAR CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LD. AO. THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE HAD FILLED THE DETAILS, INFORMATION AND EXPLAINED THE C ASE BEFORE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITY. HOWEVER WE ARE FILLING A CONSO LIDATED PAPER BOOKS FOE ALL THE A.Y.S.. IN THE PAPER BOOK PAGES AT SR. NO. 3-6 AND 10-13 ARE MAY BE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BECAUSE T HERE IS NO REFERENCE IN THE ORDER OF BOTH THE AUTHORITY. HOWE VER THEY MAY BE IN THE KNOWLEDGE IN THE AO, BEING THE SURVEY CONDUC TED IN THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THESE WERE THERE AND FOU ND ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES, AS THE BILL, BANK STATEMENTS EDCS A PPLICATION, REGISTRATION ETC AND SOME ARE THE LITERATURE. FURTH ER THESE ARE ONLY FOR REFERENCE AND TO EXPLAIN THE HONBLE BENCH ABOUT THE MODUS OPERANDI OF EDCS AND ASSESSEE AND ALSO TRIED TO EX PLAIN TO THE LOWER AUTHORITY. BUT BEING NOT FOUND ANY REFERENCE IN THE ORDER. HENCE DUE TO THIS REASON THESE DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIR ED TO FILE BEFORE YOUR HONOR AND THESE PAPERS HAVE DIRECT IMPA CT ON THE ASSESSMENT AND GOES VERY ROOT OF THE MATTER. THE HO NBLE BENCH IS THE LAST FINDING AND FACTS AUTHORITY. FURTHER WE SUBMIT THAT PAPERS AT SR. NO. 3-6 AND 10 -13 IF TREATED AS ARE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, THEN DUE TO ABO VE REASONS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SUBMITTED MAY KINDLY ADMITTED U/R 29 BY TAKING A VIEW TOWARDS A GOVT. DEPARTMENT ASSESSEE A ND OBLIGE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT D URING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 554/JP/2019 CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR VS ITO T DS, ALWAR 3 COULD NOT SUBMIT NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND OTHER EVID ENCES IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION OF ITS CASE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED T HAT DOCUMENTS PLACED IN PAPER BOOK AT SERIAL NO. 3,4,5,6, AND 10 TO 13 COU LD NOT BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE DETAILS OF ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCES ARE AS UNDER:- (I) COPY OF BUDGET ALLOCATION FOR FOREST WORK (II) COPY OF BILL OF WORK DONE THROUGH EDCS (III) COPY OF BANK STATEMENT (IV) COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF EDCS MEETING (V) COPY OF APPLICATION OF EDC REGISTRATION AND COPY OF REGISTRATION (VI) COPY OF FORMAT FOR PREPARATION OF VILLAGE RELOCATION PLAN (VII) COPY OF COMPENSATION AND COMMUNITY WORKS FOR RELOCATION PACKAGE. (VIII) COPY OF GUIDELINE OF NTCA 2011 2.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE APPL ICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER 29 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ) RULES, 1963 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE CONTENTS OF THE APPLI CATION, WE NOTICED THAT THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO PLACE ON RECORD THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS ITA NO. 554/JP/2019 CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR VS ITO T DS, ALWAR 4 IN ORDER TO SUBMIT THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR SAFE GUARD THE INTEREST OF THE ASSESSEE STATE GOVT. AS PER SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ALTHOUGHTHE ASSESSEE HAD FILED OTHER DOCUMENTS YET THE ABOVE DO CUMENTS COULD NOT BE FILED WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO PROVE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) DO NOT MENTIO N ANY OF THE OTHER DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THUS IT IS NOT EMANATING FROM THE ORDERS AS TO WHETHER THE AO OR L D. CIT(A) HAD APPLIED THEIR JUDICIAL MIND BY APPRECIATING THE DOC UMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS NOW BEING FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE NECESSARY AND IMPERATIVE TO DECIDE THE CONTROVERSY IN QUESTION. THEREFORE, IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THES E DOCUMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE CONTROVERSY AROSE BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND THUS IN OUR VIEW NO PREJUDICE SHALL BE CAUSED T O REVENUE IN CASE THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND TH E DOCUMENTS RAISED AT SERIAL NO. SERIAL NO. 3,4,5,6, AND 10 TO 13 ARE ADM ITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 2.4 SINCE WE HAVE ALLOWED THE APPLICATION FOR LEADI NG THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BY ADMITTING THE DOCUMENTS PLACED AT SERIAL NO. 3,4,5,6, AND 10 TO 13 IN THE PAPER BOOK WHICH REQUI RES VERIFICATION. ITA NO. 554/JP/2019 CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND FIELD DIRECTOR VS ITO T DS, ALWAR 5 THEREFORE, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO VERIFY THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS AND ALSO TO PASS AFRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE . THUS THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES WITH NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/10/2019 . SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO LANHI XKSLKBZ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 03/10/2019. *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- CONSERVSTOR OF FOREST & FIELD, DIREC T,TIGER PROJECT , SARISKA, ALWAR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE ITO, WARD-TDS, ALWAR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR . 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 554/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSTT. REGISTRAR