Santosh Kumar Gupta, Kolkata V. C.I.T (Appeals) XVI,Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 693/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100102 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N O N E
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ BAID ACA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: KOL KATA [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANES H, AM] I.T.A NOS. 691 & 692/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 & I.T.A NOS. 693/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WAR D-29(4), KOLKATA (PAN:AFFPG2130M) ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 23.11.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23.11.2015 FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI PANKAJ BAID, ACA FOR THE RESPONDENT: N O N E ORDER PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: ALL THESE THREE APPEALS BY ASSESSEE ARE ARISING OUT OF SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A)- XVI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NOS.30/CIT(A)-XVI/WD-29(4)/K OL/10-11, 18 & 67/CIT(A)- XVI/WD-29(4)/KOL/11-12 AND ALL DATED 31.01.2013. AS SESSMENTS WERE FRAMED BY ITO, WARD-29(4), KOLKATA U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR AYS 2008-09 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 10. 12.2010 AND U/S. 144 OF THE ACT FOR AY 2009-10 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 25.11.2011. 2. NONE IS PRESENT FOR REVENUE. REVENUE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR ADJOURNMENT ASKING FOR ADJOURNMENT IN TWENTY MATTERS OUT OF TWENTY THR EE TOTALLY FIXED IN THE CAUSE LIST. THE REASON GIVEN BY REVENUE IN ITS PETITION DATED 23.11 .2015 READS AS UNDER: I AM DIRECTED TO REQUEST TO THE HONBLE C BENCH , ITAT, KOLKATA THAT SHRI RAJAT KUMAR KUREEL, JCIT, SR. (DR) WILL NOT BE ABLE TO REPRESEN T THE ABOVE MENTIONED CASES SINCE HE IS GOING ON A VISIT TO BURDWAN FOR OFFICIAL WORK ON 23 RD NOVEMBER, 2015. ACCORDINGLY, I AM DIRECTED TO REQUEST THAT THE CAS E MAY KINDLY BE ADJOURNED FOR A LATER DATE AS PER THE CONVENIENCE OF THE HONBLE BENCH. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE IS SEEKING ADJOURNMENT ON FRIVOLOUS GROUND AND THIS IS A REGULAR FEATURE. HENCE, WITHOUT GIVING ADJOURNMENT AND SIN CE APPEAL IS PENDING SINCE 2013, WE PROCEEDED TO DECIDE IT AFTER HEARING LD. AR. 3. FIRST WE TAKE UP ITA NOS. 691 AND 693/KOL/2013. COMMON ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN THESE TWO APPEALS OF ASSESSEE, EXCEPT VARIANCE IN A MOUNT, I.E. AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 2 ITA NOS.691 TO 693/K/2013 SHRI SANTOSH KR. GUPTA, AY 2008-09 UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MADE BY AO TREATING CHEQUES AND CASH DEPOSITED INTO AXIS BANK AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. FOR THIS, ASSES SEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND NO. 2: 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.48,72,460/- (FOR ITA 691 OF 2013) AND RS.48,01,902/- (FOR ITA 693 OF 2013) M ADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TREATING CHEQUES AND CASH DEPOSITED INTO AXIS BANK AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAVE GO NE THROUGH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND SEEN THAT THE CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER EX PARTE AND DID NOT ADJUDICATE GROUND IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ORDERS OF C IT(A) ARE CRYPTIC ONE AND NON-SPEAKING. THERE IS NO IOTA OF MERITS DISCUSSED IN THE ORDERS BY CIT(A). THE DUTY OF THE CIT(A) IS TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER AFTER CONTROVERTING ALL T HE FACTS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE WITH REASONS. HENCE, WE QUASH THE ORDER OF C IT(A) AND REMIT THE APPEALS BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION WITH THE ABOVE DIR ECTION. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PUR POSES. 5. NOW, WE ARE COMING TO ITA NO. 692/KOL/2013. IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE THE ISSUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING T HE PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. FOR THIS, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND NO.1 : 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OF RS.16,38,963/- BEING @ 100% OF TAX MADE BY THE LD. AO. 6. WE HAVE HEARD LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAVE GO NE THROUGH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND SEEN THAT THE CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER EX PARTE AND DID NOT ADJUDICATE GROUND IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY SET ASIDE T HE QUANTUM APPEAL, LET THIS PENALTY APPEAL ALSO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO D ECIDE AFRESH AFTER DECIDING THE QUANTUM APPEAL. NEEDLESS TO SAY, ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ALLOWE D REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE APPEAL OF ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (M. BALAGANESH) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 23 RD NOVEMBER, 2015 JD. SR. P.S 3 ITA NOS.691 TO 693/K/2013 SHRI SANTOSH KR. GUPTA, AY 2008-09 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA, 39/5B, GOP AL NAGAR ROAD, KOLKATA-700 027. 2 RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-29(4), KOLKATA. 3. THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. CIT KOLKATA DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR .