Rajshree Kishan Pipe, Patan V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1, Patan

ITA 651/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0604 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMODKUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.651/AHD/2013 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2008-2009 RAJSHREE KISHAN PIPE C/O. JAY PRAKASH NAGARDAS PATEL BALIYA PADO MITHAWALI SHERI PATAN 384 265. PAN : AAHFR 5523 Q VS THE ITO, WARD - 1 PATAN. ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL REVENUE BY : SHRI KAMLESH MAKWANA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 09/09/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12/09/2016 $%/ O R D E R PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF LD.CIT(A)-II, SURAT DATED 16.2.2013 FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEA L READ AS UNDER: ( 1) THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER EX-PARTE AND NOT GRANTING SUFFICI ENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. (2) THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A ) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS.76 ,290/-. ITA NO.651/AHD/2013 2 (3) THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRE D IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID TO PAR TNERS OF RS.54,411/- AND REMUNERATION PAID TO PARTNERS OF RS.2,36,714/- (4) THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRE D IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE AD-HOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,00,OOO/- MADE OUT OF SELLING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. (5) THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A ) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.71,393/- AS ALLEGED U NDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF ASSETS AND ALSO ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.2,025/- ON SAID ASSETS. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE WITHOUT AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE, AND THEREFORE, MATTER M AY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE AS SESSEE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, AND GOING THROUGH T HE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ADMITTEDLY NOT OFFERED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, AND THE EXPARTE ORDER WAS PASSED CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RE STORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (MAHAVIR PRASAD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 12/09/2016