Sh. Sanjay Kumar S/O Sh.Harbans Lal, Mandi Gobindgarh V. Income Tax Officer, Mandi Gobindgarh

ITA 788/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6969 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C CHANDRAKANTA
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.788/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) SH.SANJAY KUMAR S/O SH.HARBANS LAL, VS. THE INCO ME TAX OFFICER, H. NO. 435, SECTOR 25-A, ST.NO.8, WARD-2, DASHMESH COLONY, AERY MILL ROAD, MANDI GOBINDGARH . MANDI GOBINDGARH. PAN: ABOPK0478P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT.C.CHANDRA KANTA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 05.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.08.2017 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF LD.CIT (APPEALS), PATIALA DATED 6.3.20 17 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING TH E APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,68,75,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.5,68,75,000/- HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE WORTHY CIT (A) AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDE RING THAT NO SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE AND FOR SUBMISSION OF DETAILS AND ALSO AT TIMES, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE CAUSE IN NOT FURNISHING THE INFORMATION 2 DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEAR D OR DISPOSED OFF. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) HAD PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL SINCE IT WAS NOT REPRESENTED ADEQUATELY BEFORE HIM AND ALL NOTICES S ENT TO THE ASSESSEE WERE EITHER NOT RESPONDED TO OR ADJOUR NMENT SOUGHT. 4. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE CASE COULD NOT BE ADEQUATELY REPRESENTED B EFORE THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS UNWELL D URING THE PERIOD WHEN THE HEARING TOOK PLACE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) AND HIS BLOOD SUGAR LEVELS HAD GONE DOWN TO 45MG. PER DL DURING THE SAID PERIOD FOR WHICH HE WAS UNDERGOING TREATMENT AT FORTIS MEDCENTRE, CHANDIGAR H. COPIES OF MEDICAL REPORT IN THIS REGARD WERE FILED BEFORE US. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES IN THE PRESENT APPEAL BE RESTORED TO THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, POINTED OUT THAT THOUGH ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIONS WERE FILED ON SEVER AL OCCASIONS BEFORE THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) BUT THE FACT O F THE ASSESSEE BEING UNWELL WAS NEVER BROUGHT TO THE NOTI CE OF THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) AND, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEE D TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE LD.CIT(APPEALS). 3 6. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. THE DATES OF HEARING OF APPEAL WHICH WENT UNATTENDED AS POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ARE 20/09/16, 29/09/16 AND 24/02/17. THE MEDICAL DOCUMENTS PLACED BEFORE US S HOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD LOW BLOOD SUGAR LEVELS AND WA S UNDERGOING TREATMENT AROUND THIS PERIOD. THE ASSES SEE, WE HOLD, THEREFORE HAD VALID REASONS FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) BEING UNWELL AND FOR THIS REASO N THE CASE WENT UN-REPRESENTED. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE, THEREFORE, WE CONSIDER IT FIT TO RESTORE ALL THE IS SUES RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(APPEA LS) TO CONSIDER THEM AFRESH AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY O F HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 2 ND AUGUST, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH