Amandeep Arora, Chandigarh V. DCIT, Chandigarh

ITA 725/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 80957 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTI KUMARI
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 725/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SHRI AMANDEEP ARORA, VS THE DEPUTY DIREC TOR OF S/O SHRI MADAN LAL ARORA, INCOME TAX, # 1018, SECTOR 44-B, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AGYPA0948H & ITA NO. 726/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 MS. NEERU SHARMA ARORA, VS THE DEPUTY DIRECTO R OF W/O SHRI AMANDEEP ARORA, INCOME TAX, # 1018, SECTOR 44-B, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: BAGPS5744G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJAY JAGGA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JYOTI KUMARI DATE OF HEARING : 27.10.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.10.2014 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM BOTH THE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), CHANDIGAR H DATED 13.05.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE ARGUED THE APPEAL IN THE C ASE OF SHRI AMANDEEP ARORA AND STATED THAT ISSUE IS SAME IN BOT H THE APPEALS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN 2 THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAVE NOTED THAT APPEAL IS FILED BEFORE HIM AGAINST THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICAT ION OF AN ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 220(2) OF THE ACT. THE LD. CI T(APPEALS) HELD THAT NO APPEAL LIES AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 220(2) OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND ACCORDINGLY, APPEALS WERE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4. ON GOING THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND SUBMISS IONS OF THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRE S RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT ASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE FRAMED ON 30.12.2009 AND THE INCOME TAX COMPUTATION FORM IN FORM NO. ITN-150 PROVIDES ADDITION ON ACCOU NT OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 220(2) OF THE ACT. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT BEFO RE ASSESSING OFFICER CLAIMING THEREIN THAT SINCE THERE WAS NIL DEMAND AND IN FACT THERE IS AN EXCESS PAYMENT, THEREFORE REFUND IS CLA IMED, HENCE NO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 220(2) OF THE ACT COULD BE C HARGED. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DECIDED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT WHICH WAS SUBJECT MATTER IN APPEAL B EFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS). HENCE, THERE IS NO SEPARATE ORDERS U NDER SECTION 220(2) OF THE ACT HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE LD. C IT(APPEALS). HE HAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RE MANDED TO THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 7. THE LD. DR., HOWEVER RELIED UPON THE IMPUGNED OR DER. 8. ON GOING THROUGH THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS LIABLE TO BE SET A SIDE BECAUSE NO 3 SPECIFIC ORDER UNDER SECTION 220(2) REMAINED IN CHA LLENGE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE MADE A REQUEST BEFORE A SSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT FOR RECTIFICAT ION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER/COMPUTATION OF INCOME CLAIMING EXC ESS REFUND, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS MISCONSTRUED TH E FACTS BY OBSERVING THAT ORDER UNDER SECTION 220(2) HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN PASSING ORDERS UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT WHICH IS CORRECTLY APP EALABLE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND HENCE, LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS BOUND TO DECIDE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ON MERITS. WE, ACCORDINGL Y SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AND RESTORE BOTH THE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE BOTH THE A PPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ON MERITS GIVING REASONS FOR DECISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER BY GIVING REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. 9. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH OCTOBER,2014. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAIN I) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH OCTOBER,2014. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH