Shri Harjeet Singh, Mohali V. ITO-Ward-6(4), Mohali

ITA 58/CHANDI/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2304 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 14-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KUMAR KHANNA CIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 143(3); 147; 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., ! '# $ %', ! BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , RAJPAL YADAV, VP ITA NO.58/CHD/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI HARJEET SINGH SHRI HARPREET SINGH, 3146, SECTOR- 125, NEW SUNNY ENCLAVE, KHARAR MOHALI-140301, PUNJAB THE ITO WARD-6(4), MOHALI- 140301 PUNJAB TAN NO: BGXPS5337J APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL, ADVOCATE #!' REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KUMAR KHANNA, ADDL. CIT $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 19/11/2020 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19/11/2020 %&/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT . 17/10/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL : 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2 , CHANDIGARH AS ERRED IN PASSING EX-PARTY ORDER AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE SAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL, T HE ADDITION AS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IF FINALLY HEARD OR DISPOSED OFF. 3. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORT UNITY OF BEING HEARD. 2 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE A.O. ON THE BA SIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH OF RS. 13,19,000/- IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK, CHANDIGARH AND PAID RS. 17,56,482/- AG AINST CREDIT BILLS DURING THE F.Y. 2009-10 RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THAT NO RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY HIM. HE THEREFORE INITIATED THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECT ION 147 R.W.S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS A CT) . THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT WHENEVER THE CASE WAS FIXED EITHER THE ASSESSE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT OR DID NOT ATTEND. AND WHENEVER THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED AND FILED WRITTEN SUBM ISSION THOSE WERE PLACED ON RECORD. THE A.O. FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT EXPARTE AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 30,75,482/-( RS. 13,19,000 + 17,56,482) BY OBSERVING THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION THE SAID AMOUNT STOOD UNEXPLAINED. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL BY PASING THE IMPUGNED ORDER EXP ARTE. 6. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 7. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 8. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTIC E FOR HEARING ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MA DE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALL THE EVIDENCES TO PRO VE HIS CASE. 9. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE I MPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S NON COOPERATIVE AND NEVER ATTENDED, THEREFORE THERE WAS NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO D ECIDE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE. IN HIS REJOINDER THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DT. 26/10/2018 FOR THE SUBSEQUENT A.Y. 2011-12 WHEREIN SIMILAR TYPE OF CREDIT CARD PAYMENT WERE ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. 3 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE I T IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE A.O. FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT EXPARTE UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT AND THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE, HE SIMPLY STATED THAT THE VARIOUS NOTICE FOR HEARING WERE ISSUED ON DIFFERENT DATES TO THE ASSESSEE BY SPEED POST AND NONE APPEARED. HOWEVER NOWHERE HE BROUGHT ON RECORD THAT T HE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED, UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM, AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . 11. WE THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATUR AL JUSTICE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE O F THE A.O. TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONA BLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19/11/2020 ). SD/- SD/- $ %' .., (RJAPAL YADAV ) ( N.K. SAINI) ! / VICE PRESIDENT ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 19/11/2020 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE