SHRI MADAN GOPAL BANSAL, Jaipur V. DCIT, BHARATPUR

ITA 573/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59510 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJEEV PANDEY
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH : JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.L. KALRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.572 & 573/JP/2011 ASSTT. YEARS : 2002-03 & 2003-04 PAN:ABTPB5934A SH. MADAN LAL BANSAL, VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX, BHARATPUR. CIRCLE, BHARATPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJEEV PANDEY, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D.K. PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.12.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:03.01.2012 ORDER PER R.K. GUPTA, JM THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF CIT (A), ALWAR, DATED 11.03.2011 RELATIN G TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 & 2003-04 RESPECTIVELY. AS THE ISSUES INVOL VED IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BE ING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED BY T HE LD. CIT(A) BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED APPEAL AG AINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT, THE ACT), AND 2 THEREFORE, THESE APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. THE REASON ASSIGNED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW IS INCORRECT BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEALED AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT, BY WHICH THE ORDERS OF THE AO WERE SET ASIDE TO PASS DENOVO ORD ERS. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED AND AGAINST THE ADDITION S MADE BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE LD. CI T(A) WAS DUTY BOUND TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. 2.1. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED T HAT IN FACT THE AO NEGATED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY CONSIDERING SO ME INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM LIC DIRECTLY BY THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS R EQUESTED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO PASS F RESH ORDER AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EVIDENCES CONSIDERED WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, PLACED RELIANCE O N THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSE E, WE FIND MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE AO SHOULD HAVE CONFRONTED THE MATERIAL WHICH WAS BEING USED AGAINS T THE ASSESSEE. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF KISHAN CHAND C HELLA RAM VS. CIT 125 ITR 713, HAS HELD THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE 3 MATERIAL BEING USED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW O F THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND REMAND BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FO R BOTH OF THE YEARS WITH THE DIRECTION TO PASS FRESH ORDER AFTER CONFRONTING THE MATERIAL AND AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.01 .2012 SD/- SD/- (N.L. KALRA) ( R.K. GUPTA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R DATED : 03.01.2012 /SKR/ COPY FORWARDED TO :- THE ASSESSEE: SH. MADAN GOPAL BANSAL, BHARATPUR. THE DCIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR. THE CIT (A), THE CIT, THE D/R, ITAT, JAIPUR. GUARD FILE (ITA NOS. 572 & 573/JP/2011 BY ORDER