M/S DEVIKA TRADERS, JAIPUR V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

ITA 807/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2229 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDRA JHA CIT DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148

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 HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 807/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S DEVIKA TRADERS, A-3, SURAJPOLE MANDI, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AACFD 4063 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA JHA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 03/01/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/01/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FR OM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-4, JAIPUR DATED 18/09/2017 FOR THE A. Y. 2006-07. 2. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 17/10/2006 DECLA RING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 12,012/- ONLY. THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT) ON 26/03/2013. AFTER SCRUTINY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER M ADE ADDITION OF RS. 13,16,584/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES. T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ITA 807/JP/2017_ M/S DEVIKA TRADERS VS DCIT 2 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT ON 14/9/2017, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT BY TAKING FOLL OWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, LD. AO HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT PROVIDING THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE OF SPECI FIC REQUESTS MADE THUS THE CONSEQUENT REASSESSMENT COMPLETED IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY L D. AO WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE, WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IT IS THU S PRAYED THAT ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE SET ASIDE . 2.1 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN DECIDING T HE APPEAL EX PARTE AS THE REASONS DUE TO WHICH CASE COULD NOT BE ATTEN DED TO BY COUNSEL WERE ABSOLUTELY GENUINE , WHICH WERE NOT CO NSIDERED BY LD.CIT(A) AND THE CASE WAS DECIDED WITHIN A SPAN OF 45 DAYS FROM THE FIRST HEARING FIXED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD.AO IN R EJECTING BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961, ARBITRARILY. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING TRADING ADDITION OF R S. 13,16,584/- MADE BY LD.AO, BEING 25% OF TOTAL PURCHASES OF RS.5 2,66,335/- MADE FROM VARIOUS PARTIES, BY HOLDING THE SAME AS, UNVERIFIABLE & BOGUS BY GROSSLY IGNORING THE EVIDENCES ADDUCED A ND SUBMISSIONS MADE, WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORT UNITY TO ASSESSEE. ITA 807/JP/2017_ M/S DEVIKA TRADERS VS DCIT 3 4.1 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS MADE BY LD.AO WITHOUT AFFORDING ADEQUATE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE AND ALSO WIT HOUT MAKING PROPER ENQUIRIES AND INVESTIGATION TO THE OVERWHELM ING EVIDENCE/MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. A.O., THUS THE ADDITION MADE DESERVES TO BE DELETED . 3. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LD AR OF THE ASSES SEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DENIED NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY NOT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THE REASO N FOR SEEKING THE ADJOURNMENT WAS ABSOLUTELY GENUINE AND HE PLEADED TH AT ALL THE DATES OF HEARING COMMENCING FROM 31/3/2017 TO 14/09/2017 WERE WITH A SPAN OF 45 DAYS. THUS, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DECIDING THE APPEAL EX PARTE. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IF THE MATTER IS R ESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SHALL COOPERATE IN F INALIZATION OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 4. THE LD SR.DR WAS NOT HAVING ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION TO THIS PROPOSITION. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND TAKING INTO CON SIDERATION ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS INCLUDING THE REJECTION OF ADJOURNME NT APPLICATION AND SHORT SPAN TO DATE OF HEARING, THE BENCH IS OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, THIS MATTER NEEDS A FRESH LOOK AT THE LEVEL OF LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IS RESTORED TO T HE FILE OF THE LD. ITA 807/JP/2017_ M/S DEVIKA TRADERS VS DCIT 4 CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUAT E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL COOP ERATE IN FINALIZATION OF THE APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/01/2018. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 04 TH JANUARY, 2018 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- M/S DEVIKA TRADERS, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 807/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR