Divyesh Sureshchandra Gupta, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1) previously Ward-7(2)(5), Ahmedabad

ITA 864/AHD/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9340 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-12-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORTHEASSESSEE.HOWEVER; LD.DRVEHEMENTLYSUPPORTEDTHE
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIKCTHAKER

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण , अहमदाबादनयायपीी INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL, ‘’SMC’’BENCH,AHMEDABAD BEFORESHRIWASEEMAHMED,ACCOUNTANTMEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITANo.864/AHD/2023 धििाधरणवरध / Asstt.Year:2012-2013 DivyeshSureshchandraGupta, 101,SakarCountry, Nr.ShantiAsiaticSchool, ShelaRoad, Bopal Ahmedabad-380058. PAN:ALHPG1165C Vs. TheIncomeTaxOfficer, Ward-7(2)(1), PreviouslyWard7(2)(5), Ahmedabad (Applicant)(Respondent) Assesseeby:ShriKCThaker,A.R Revenueby:Ms.SaumyaPandeyJain,Sr.D.R सुिवाईकीतारीख /DateofHearing:27/12/2023 घोरणाकीतारीख/DateofPronouncement:29/12/2023 आदेश /ORDER PERWASEEMAHMED,ACCOUNTANTMEMBER: ThecaptionedappealhasbeenfiledattheinstanceoftheAssesseeagainst theorderoftheLearnedCommissionerofIncomeTax(Appeals),Ahmedabad, arisinginthematterofassessmentorderpassedunders.143(3)r.w.s.147ofthe IncomeTaxAct,1961(here-in-afterreferredtoas"theAct")relevanttothe AssessmentYear2012-2013. 2.Attheoutset,itwasnoticedthattheLd.CIT(A)hasconfirmedtheorderof theAOonthereasoningthattherewereseveralnoticesissuedtotheassessee buttherewasnocompliance.TherelevantfindingoftheLd.CIT(A)readsas under: 5.4Duringthecourseofappellateproceedings,sufficientopportunitiesweregiventothe appellant,however,nosubmissions/evidences/documentshavebeenfiledbytheappellant tosubstantiatethegroundsofappeal.Theappellantwasgivenspecificopportunitytofile ITAno.864/AHD/2023 Asstt.Year2012-13 2 anydetailsfiledbyhimbeforeanyauthorityphysically/onlineearlierasnorepliesofthe appellantarefoundexistingintheonlinesystem.Thus,intheabsenceofany submission/documents,Ihavenomaterialtointerferewithobservationsandaddition madebytheAO.Inviewoftheabove,IupheldthedecisionoftheAOandconfirmthe additionofRs.35,07,619/-.Accordingly,allgroundsofappealareherebydismissed. 3.However,atthetimeofhearingtheLd.ARbeforeusfiledapaperbook runningfrompagesA1toC-3and1to42andcontendedthattheassesseehas filedwrittensubmissionrunninginto45pagesasevidentfrome-proceedings responseacknowledgmentvideletteracknowledgmentdated28/09/2023, whereasLd.CIT(A),haspassedtheorderdated13/10/2023.AspertheLd.AR, thewrittensubmissionswerefiledbytheassesseemuchearlierpassingtheorder bytheLd.CIT(A),butthesamehasnotbeenconsideredinadvertently. Accordingly,theLd.ARprayedbeforeustorestoretheissuetothefileofLd. CIT(A),forfreshadjudicationaspertheprovisionsoflaw. 4.Ontheotherhand,theLd.DRcouldnotcontroverttheargumentadvanced bytheLd.Counselfortheassessee.However,Ld.DRvehementlysupportedthe orderoftheauthoritiesbelow. 5.Ihaveheardtherivalcontentionsofboththepartiesandperusedthe materialsavailableonrecord.Fromtheprecedingdiscussion,thereremainsno ambiguitytothefactthattheassesseehasfileddetailedreplyduringthe appellateproceedingswhichwerenotinadvertentlyconsideredbytheLd.CIT(A), whilepassingtheorder.Thus,itappearstousthattheLd.CIT(A),haspassedthe orderonwrongassumptionsoffactandwithoutconsideringtheWritten Submissionoftheassessee.Accordingly,intheinterestofjusticeandfairplay,we areinclinedtorestoretheissuetothefileoftheLd.CIT(A)forfreshadjudication afterconsideringthewrittensubmissionoftheassesseeaspertheprovisionof law.Hence,thegroundofappealoftheassesseeisallowedforthestatistical purposes. ITAno.864/AHD/2023 Asstt.Year2012-13 3 6.Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheassesseeisallowedforthestatistical purposes. OrderpronouncedintheCourton29/12/2023atAhmedabad. Sd/-Sd/-/-/-/- (TRSENTHILKUMAR)(WASEEMAHMED) JUDICIALMEMBERACCOUNTANTMEMBER (TrueCopy)) Ahmedabad;Dated29/12/2023 Manish