M/S FALCON SERVICES, Kanpur V. ITO 1(1), Kanpur

ITA 558/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4608 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.558/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), CIVIL LINES, KANPUR VS M/S FALCON SERVICES 18/157, THE MALL, KANPUR PAN AABFF 3725 E (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) NONE APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, DR RESPONDENT BY 24/02/2016 DATE OF HEARING 15 /0 3 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF LD. CIT (A)-I, LUCKNOW DATED 28.05.2015 FOR THE AY 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. BECAUSE ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) IS BAD BOTH OF LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN REJECTING THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSE E THAT PROPER NOTICE WAS NOT ISSUED & SERVED UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 AND ASSESSING OFFICER HA S FAILED TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN BY HON'BLE SUPERI OR COURTS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE. 2 3. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IS INVALID AS NOTICE AS REQUIRED UNDER LAW HAS NOT BEEN SERVED ON THE APPELLANT FOR FRAMING ASSESSMENT AND SUSTAINING THE ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT ANNULLING THE ORDER PASSED US 14 4 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMIN G AN ASSESSMENT ASSESSING INCOME UNDER THE STATUS 'AOP' WITH ACCORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. 5. BECAUSE THE ID. CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS OF THE CASE IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WITHOUT AP PRECIATING THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELL ANT TO FURNISH RELEVANT DOCUMENTS DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEE DING AND ALSO IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE APPE LLANT WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE AS LAID DOWN IN RULE 46 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 6. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING THE INTEREST AND SALARY TO PARTNERS OF THE FIRM AND TRE ATING THE FIRM AS AOP. THE CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IS ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE PRIN CIPLE OF JUSTICE. 7. BECAUSE THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO AL TER OR TO MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF NOTICE ON AN EARLIER OCCASION ALSO AND THIS APPEAL WAS EARLIER HEARD EX -PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER, EX-PARTE TRIBUNALS ORDER WAS RECAL LED IN MA NO. 135/LKW/2015 DATED 14.12.2015 AND THE APPEAL WAS FI XED FOR HEARING AS PER THIS MAS ORDER ON 19.01.2016. ON THIS DATE, HEARIN G WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE TO 11.02.2016 AND AGAIN ON THIS DATE, 3 HEARING WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF LD. AR OF T HE ASSESSEE AND THE HEARING WAS FIXED ON 24.02.2016. ON THIS DATE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THERE IS NO REQUEST OF ADJOURNMENT ALSO. UNDER THESE FACTS, THE APPEAL WAS AGAIN HEARD EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSE E. 4. LD. DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AU THORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DR OF T HE REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE CAR EFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN TH E IMPUGNED GROUNDS IN THE LIGHT OF ASSESSEE CONTENTIONS AND WE FIND NO INFIRM ITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, CONFIRM THE ORDER OF LD. CI T(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DAT E MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (A.K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15/03/2016 AKS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.TH E RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTR AR