SHANTI KUMAR JAIN, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 752/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1968 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BHATEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: ADJ APPLICATION REJE CTED
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES SMC, JAIPUR JH IH-DS-CALY] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 752/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHANTI KUMAR JAIN, J-1160, SARRAF SADAN, KHARBUJA MANDI, M.D. ROAD, JAIPUR CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAQPJ 4473 Q VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : ADJ. APPLICATION REJECTED. JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI O.P. BHATEJA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 02/11/2015 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03/11/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, A.M. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/08/2014 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR FOR A. Y. 2008-09. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THO UGH THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED, WHICH WAS DISMI SSED IN ABSENCE OF ITA 752/JP/2014_ SHANTI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO 2 ANY REASONABLE CAUSE. I, THEREFORE, DECIDED TO DISP OSE OFF THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LD DR. 3. AFTER HEARING THE LD DR AND GOING THROUGH T HE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW, I NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAS PASSED AN EX PARTE ORDER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), THUS, IN MY OPINION, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED P ROPER OPPORTUNITY TO ADDUCE THE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AMOUNTING TO RS. 7.5 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE BANK. SIMILARLY, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE CASH CREDIT AMOUNTING TO RS. 26,000/-, I THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) AN D RESTORE BOTH THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRE CTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL REDECIDE THIS ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GIVI NG PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO D IRECTED TO ADDUCE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE ON WHICH HE MAY RELY BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO COOPERATE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SOUGHT THE ADJOURNMENT FOR MORE THAN THREE TIMES, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL REMAIN CONFIRMED. ITA 752/JP/2014_ SHANTI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/11/2015. SD/- IH-DS-CALY (P.K. BANSAL) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 03 RD NOVEMBER, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SH. SHANTI KUMAR JAIN, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 752/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR