Shri Abhishake Srivastava, Lucknow V. Income Tax Officer, Lucknow

ITA 769/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 76923714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH GIDWANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.769/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 SHRI. ABHISHAKE SRIVASTAVA C-409, INDIRA NAGAR LUCKNOW V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(1) LUCKNOW TAN/PAN:CMLPS4415G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. HARISH GIDWANI, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 21 04 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 06 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDER WHICH IS ILLEGAL, IMPROPER AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. (2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE HIM. (3) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.19,28,500/- MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT. :- 2 -: 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT AFFORDED OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT THOUGH OPPORTUNITIES WERE AFFORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE COMPLIANCE THEREOF AND SIMILAR WAS THE POSITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE RAISED BEFORE US AFTER AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO EXTEND ALL SORTS OF CO-OPERATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT ON THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE US. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:5 TH JUNE, 2015 JJ:2104 :- 3 -: COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR