Abdul Samad Miah, Kolkata V. ITO-Ward-2, Cooch Behar, Coochbihar

ITA 790/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7846 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MADHU MALATI GHOSH
• Assessee Lawyers: V N PUROHIT

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 790/KOL./2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA B BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER), AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO. 790/KOL/ 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-2009 ABDUL SAMAD MIAH,.................................. ....................APPELLANT C/O. A. KAYES & CO., 231, KAMALALAYA CENTRE, 156A, LENIN SARANI, KOLKATA-700 013 [PAN : AIKPM 7323 E] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ...................RESPONDENT WARD-2, COOCHBEHAR, AAAYAKAR BHAWAN, AAYAKAR AVENUE, DEBI BARI (N), COOCHBEHAR-736 101 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI V.N. PUROHIT, FCA, FOR THE ASSESSEE SMT. MADHU MALATI GHOSH, JCIT, FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 18, 201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JALPAIGURI IN APPEAL NO. 14/COB/CIT(A)/JAL/10-11 DATED 09.03.2012 FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. SHRI V.N. PUROHIT, FCA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SMT. MADHU MALATI GHOSH, JCIT (D.R.) REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. I.T.A. NO. 790/KOL./2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE ALL THE EVIDENCES BE FORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS THE ASSESSEE WAS IN KOLKATA AND HIS AUDITOR AT COOCHBEHAR HAD NOT PRODU CED ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS THE PRAYER THA T THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE ALL THE EVID ENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS THE PRAYER THAT THESE ISS UES MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDIC ATION. LD. A.R. PLACED BEFORE US A PAPER BOOK PERTAINING TO SUBSTANTIAL NU MBER OF FRESH EVIDENCES. 4. IN REPLY, LD. JCIT, D.R. DID NOT OBJECT TO THE I SSUES BEING RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATI ON. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF FRESH E VIDENCES, WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NOT PRODUCIN G ALL THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ISSUES IN THIS AP PEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/- SD/- SHAMIM YAHYA GEORGE MATHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JU DICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 22 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014 I.T.A. NO. 790/KOL./2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIES TO : (1) ABDUL SAMAD MIAH, C/O. A. KAYES & CO., 231, KAMALALAYA CENTRE, 156A, LENIN SARANI, KOLKATA-700 013 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, COOCHBEHAR, AAAYAKAR BHAWAN, AAYAKAR AVENUE, DEBI BARI (N), COOCHBEHAR-736 101 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.