Sh. Prithpal Singh, Jammu V. The Income tax Officer, Jammu

ITA 627/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 62720914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 23-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIK CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR.(SMC) BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.624 TO 629(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS:1998-99 TO 2002-03 & 2004-05 PAN :AZXPS8198P SHRI PRITHPAL SINGH VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, S/O KANHAIYA SINGH WARD 1(2), H/NO.97, GALI NO.5, JAMMU. PREET NAGAR, DIGIANA, JAMMU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH.P.N.ARORA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY:SH.AMRIK CHAND, DR DATE OF HEARING: 14/03/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:14/03/2014 ORDER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT SIX APPEALS AGA INST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF CIT(A), JAMMU EACH DATED 02.08.2013 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS 1998-99 TO 2002-03 & 2004-05 RESPECTIVELY. THE ISSUES INVOL VED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL EXCEPT VARIATION IN AMOUNTS, THEREFORE, THESE ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR TH E SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. THE ITA NO.624 TO 629(ASR)/2013 2 GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.624(ASR)/2 013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99, WHICH ARE SIMILAR IN OTHER APPEALS, ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 1. PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WAS NOT PROVIDED TO EXPLAIN THE DETAIL OF THE CASE. 2. THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES ARE BAS ELESS AND UNWARRANTED. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BAS IS OF STATEMENT, A COPY OF WHICH WAS NEVER PROVIDED AND N OT EVEN ALLOWED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE HOUSEHO LD EXPENDITURE WAS GIVEN. 3. THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF RS.106000.00 IS TOTALLY UNWARRANTED AND FAR AWAY FROM THE FACTS. THE CREDIT APPEARING IN THE TRUCK REPAYMENT LOAN ACCOUNT WITH CANARA BAN K, JAMMU CAN BE DULY EXPLAINED IF PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPO RTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IS PROVIDED. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES A RE NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED TO R EPEAT THE SAME FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. P.N.ARORA, ADVOCATE, STATED THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTH ORITY HAS NOT AFFORDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS CONTR ARY TO THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUE IN DIS PUTE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, A S PER LAW. ITA NO.624 TO 629(ASR)/2013 3 4. THE LD. DT, SH. AMRIK CHAND, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, ESPECIALLY IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DATED 02.08.2013. I AM OF THE CONSIDERED THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT AFFORDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DETAILS OF THE CASE, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IN T HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO SUB STANTIATE HIS CLAIM BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR WHICH, OPPORTUNIT Y OF HEARING HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A), WHILE DECIDING THE ISSU E IN DISPUTE. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS CANCELLED AND THE ISSUE IN DI SPUTE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6. SINCE WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IN ITA NO.624(ASR)/2013 TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE OTHER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NOS. 625 TO 629(ASR)/2014 ARE ALSO SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), AS THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL TO THE F ACTS DECIDED BY ME IN ITA ITA NO.624 TO 629(ASR)/2013 4 NO.624(ASR)/2013, FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH IN A CCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSE E. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE SIX APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14TH MARCH, 2014. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 14TH MARCH, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SHRI PRITHPAL SINGH, JAMMU 2. THE ITO WARD-1(2), JAMMU 3. THE CIT(A), JAMMU 4. THE CIT, JAMMU 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR