Sreenath Konnipati, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

ITA 775/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8310 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K GOPALAKRISHNA
• Assessee Lawyers: GVVS MURTHY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 69; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 77 5 /HYD/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 9 - 1 0 SREENATH KONNIPATI, HYDERABAD. PAN AQXPK 69366 E VS. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 7 ( 1 ), HYDERABAD. ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GVVS MURTHY REVENUE BY : SHRI K. GOPALA KRISHNA DATE OF HEARING 18 / 0 9 /2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03 / 1 0 / 201 8 O R D E R PER S . RIFAUR RAHMAN , A .M. : T H IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 3 , HYDERABAD DATED 3 / 10 /2017 FOR AY 20 09 - 10 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE, BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 65,76,261/ - WITH THE ICICI BANK, HABSIGUDA BRANCH, HYDERABAD AND THERE WERE NO SOURCES FOR DEPOSIT SUCH HUGE AMOUNTS AS PER THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT) TO THE ASSESSEE ON 31/03/2016 WITH PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE PR. CIT 3, HYDERABAD. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED AND FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE FOR CASH DEPOSITS IN ICICI BANK, THE AO TREATED THE TOTAL DEPOSITS OF RS. 65,76,261/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ICICI BANK, AS UNEXPLAINED INVE STMENT U/S 69 OF THE ACT AND MADE THE ADDITION OF THE SAME. 2 ITA NO. 775 /HYD/1 8 SREENATH KONNIPATI, HYD. 3. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) , WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE 1.T ACT IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND PROVISIONS OF LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SERVED WITH PROPER NOTICE IN THE WAY AND UNDER THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN SECT. 282 OF INCOME TAX ACT, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRESENT HIMSELF BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PRESENT HIS CASE. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THERE WAS NO VALID SERVICE OF NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 148 OF THE 1.T.ACT ,THEREFORE, THE SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 144 LW.S. 147 OF THE I.T. ACT IS TO BE QUASHED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO DEFEND HIS CASE BY CALLING A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO WITH REGARDS TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE PRESENTED BY HIM BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (A). 5. THE LEARNED CIT (A) FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SUBMISSIONS MADE ON T HE MERITS OF THE CASE, INSTEAD, WITHOUT DISCUSSION, SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE GROUND IN A CAUSAL MANNER. 6. FOR THESE AND OTHER REASONS THAT ARE TO BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE CASE IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) MAY B E SET ASIDE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE . 6. BEFORE US, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE PART OF PAPER BOOK FILED AND SUBMITTED THAT AT SL. NOS. 1 & 2 WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO AND REST OF THE DOCUMENTS FROM SL. NO. 3 TO 8 WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A): SL.NO. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS PAGES 1 COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2009 - 10 FILED ON 22/01/2010 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME 1 - 2 2 ICICI BANK STATEMENT FROM 01/04/2008 TO 31/03/2009 3 - 42 3 COPY OF PROFIT AND LOSS A/C IN SHARES IN THE BOOKS OF SHAREKHAN LTD. 43 3 ITA NO. 775 /HYD/1 8 SREENATH KONNIPATI, HYD. 4 COPY OF SCRIP - WISE SUMMARY IN THE BOOKS OF SHARE KHAN LTD. 44 5 COPY OF ASSESSEES (CLIENT - WISE/SCRIP - WISE) SUMMARY (NSE & BSE) IN SHARE KHAN LTD/S BOOKS 45 - 47 6 COPY OF CLIENT WISE/SCRIP - WISE DETAILED REPORT IN SHARE KHAN LTDS BOOKS 48 7 COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF SHAREKHAN LTD. 49 - 52 8 COPY OF STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 31/03/2009 53 6.1 REFERRING TO THE ABOVE DOC UMENTS, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) FAILED TO CONSIDER THE DOCUMENTS PLACED IN THE APPEAL. FURTHER, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE AO AND DIRECTED TO CALL FOR A REMAND REPORT WHILE CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF AO. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE DE - NOVO. 7. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 8. CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECOR D. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) WITHOUT APPRECIATING OR EXAMINING THE DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE HIM IN THE PROPER PERSPECTIVE, UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO. ACCORDING TO LD. AR, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE REMITTED THE MATTER BAC K TO THE AO OR OUGHT TO HAVE CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM AO. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, WE SE T ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WI TH A DIRECTION TO RE - DO THE ASSESSMENT DE - NOVO AFTER EXAMINING THE DOCUMENTS AS PER LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4 ITA NO. 775 /HYD/1 8 SREENATH KONNIPATI, HYD. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD OCTOBER , 2018 . SD/ - SD/ - ( P. MADHAVI DEVI ) (S . RIFAUR RAHMAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 3 RD OCTOBER , 2018 KV C OPY TO: - 1) SREENATH KONNIPATI, C/O GVVS MURTHY, ADVOCATE, 1 - 2 - 607/27/6, ACT COLLEGE ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 080. 2) ITO, WARD NO. 7 ( 1 ), HY DERABAD 3) CIT(A) 3 , HYDERABAD. 4) PR. CIT 3 , HYD. 5 ) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDERABAD. 6 ) GUARD FILE S.NO DESCRIPTION DATE INTLS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON SR.P.S./P.S 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR.P.S/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./PS SR.P.S./P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR. P.S./P.S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S./P.S 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER