M/s Sujatha Enterprises, Sandur V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 574/BANG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57492 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSAN THOMAS JOSE JT
• Assessee Lawyers: V SRINIVASAN
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.574/BANG/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. SUJATHA ENTERPRISES, AMRUTH NIVAS, KRISHNANAGAR, SANDUR 583 119. KARNATAKA. PAN : AAWFS 0711L VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. SRINIVASAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SUSAN THOMAS JOSE, JT.CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 27.02.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.02.2012 O R D E R PER N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.03.2011 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-VI, BANGALORE. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L: 1. THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN SO FAR AS THEY ARE AGAINST THE APPELLANT ARE OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY, W EIGHT OF EVIDENCE, PROBABILITIES, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NO.574/BANG/2011 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. THE LEARNED CIT[A] IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINI NG AN ADDITION OF RS.18,19,427/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF CRV CAR UNDER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE RIGHT TO SEEK WAIVER W ITH THE HON'BLE CCIT/DG , THE APPELLANT DENIES ITSELF LIABLE TO BE CHARGED TO INTEREST U/S 234-A, 234-B AND 234-C OF THE ACT, WHICH UNDER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT 'S CASE DESERVES TO BE CANCELLED. 4. FOR THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URG ED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, YOUR APPELLANT HUMBL Y PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED AND JUSTICE RENDERED AND THE APPELLANT MAY BE AWARDED COSTS IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND ALSO ORDER FOR THE REFUND OF THE INSTITUTION FEES AS PART OF THE C OSTS. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE I S THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAD NOT GIVEN DUE AND PROPER OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD AND DECIDED THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM EX PARTE AND NO COGENT REASON HAS BEEN GIVEN WHILE CONFIRMING THE ACTION O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. IN HER RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED T HE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER R EFERRED TO AS THE ACT IN SHORT]. THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE AND CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. IN PARA 2 OF THE I MPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED THAT NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 24.0 2.2011 WHICH WAS DULY SERVED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 26.02.2011. IT IS H OWEVER NOTICED THAT IN ITA NO.574/BANG/2011 PAGE 3 OF 3 THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED TH E DATE OF HEARING AS 14.03.2011, BUT THE SAID ORDER IS SILENT ON THIS FA CT AS TO WHETHER THE NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FOR THE HEARING ON 14. 03.2011. IT THEREFORE APPEARS THAT DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SH OULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE EM BODIED IN THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . WE THEREFORE DEEM IT FIT TO REMAND THIS CASE BAC K TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ( N.K. SAINI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 27 TH FEBRUARY , 2012. DS/- COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. C IT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, BANGALORE.