SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

ITA 875/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1799 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY MALICK CIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Gift; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 234B; 147

Judgement Text

ITA NO.875/JP/201 7 SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA VS ITO, WARD- 7(2), JAIPUR 1 VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH FOT; IKWY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAUL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 875/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA VILLAGE: PINDOLAI,BUGALIYA KI DHANI POST: MACHWA VIA KALWAR, JAIPUR 302 012 (RAJ) CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 7(2) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AIKPB 1628 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SHRAWAN GUPTA, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI AJAY MALICK , ADDL. CIT - DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27/12/2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 /12/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAUL RAO, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-3, JAIPUR DATED 22-09-2017 FOR THE ASSESSEE 2009-10. T HE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CONCISE GROUNDS AS UNDER:- 1.1 THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S 144/148 DATED 29-12-20 14 IS BAD IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE, FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION, BARRED BY LIMITATION AND VARIOUS OTHER REASONS AND HENCE THE SAME MAY KINDLY BE QUAS HED. 1.2 THE ACTION TAKEN U/S 147 IS BAD IN LAW AND ON F ACTS OF THE CASE, FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION AND VARIOUS OTHER REASONS AND HENCE THE SAME MAY KINDLY BE QUASHED. ITA NO.875/JP/201 7 SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA VS ITO, WARD- 7(2), JAIPUR 2 2. THE LD. AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) HAVE GROSSLY ER RED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN PASSING THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND APPELLATE ORDER, WITHOUT PROVIDING THE ADEQUATE AND REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN GROSS BREACH OF LAW. HENCE, THE ORDER SO PASSED MAY KINDLY BE QUASHED AND THE ADDITIONS SO MAY KINDLY BE DELETED IN FULL. 3. RS. 10,51,000/-: THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRE D IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,51,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT (WHICH HAS BEEN R ECEIVED AS GIFT FROM HIS MOTHER).HENCE, THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO AND C ONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS BEING TOTALLY CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS ON THE RECORD AND THE ADDITION MAY KINDLY BE DELETED IN FULL. 4. THE LD. AO HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS O N THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234A, 234B & 234C. TH E APPELLANT TOTALLY DENIES ITS LIABILITY OF CHARGING OF ANY SUCH INTEREST. THE INT EREST, SO CHARGED, BEING CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS, MAY KINDLY BE D ELETED IN FULL. 5. THE APPELLANT PRAYS YOUR HONOUR INDULGENCES TO A DD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. 2.1 I HAVE HEARD THE LD.AR AS WELL AS LD. DR AND CA REFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN THIS CA SE WAS PASSED U/S 147/144 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFOR E THE AO. THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS A CA SH DEPOSIT OF RS. 10.51 LACS IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH ICICI BANK LTD., JHOTWARA, JAIPUR. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO PASSED THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND ASSESSED THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 10.51 LACS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE AO BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, DE SPITE VARIOUS NOTICES, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON AN Y OF THE DATES OF HEARING AND ITA NO.875/JP/201 7 SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA VS ITO, WARD- 7(2), JAIPUR 3 CONSEQUENTLY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX-PARTE CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO. 2.2 THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE AFFIDAVIT AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM THAT NONE OF THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO OR BY THE LD. CIT(A) WAS SERVED UPON HIM. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GI VEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10.51 LACS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE A SSESSEE WAS FROM SALE CONSIDERATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SOLD BY THE MOTH ER OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELO W AND HAS NOT FILED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES OR OTHERWISE EXPLANATION TO E XPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK, THEREFORE, THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW HAVE ASSESSED THE SAID AMOUNT AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON PERUSAL O F THE ORDERS OF THE AO AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT(A), IT IS MANIFEST THAT THOUGH VARIO US NOTICES WERE ISSUED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW YET NOTHING HAS BEEN STATED ABOUT THE SERVICES OF THOSE NOTICES ON THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE THAT ASSESSEE IS RESIDING IN A REMOTE RURAL AREA WHICH IS ALSO AWAY FROM PROPER VILLAGE, THEREFORE, NON RECEIPT OF NOTICE BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE RUL ED OUT. ACCORDINGLY, HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN THE I NTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE RECORD OF THE AO FOR GIVING ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEN PASSING ORDER AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ITA NO.875/JP/201 7 SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA VS ITO, WARD- 7(2), JAIPUR 4 ASSESSEE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE UNDERTOOK TO RE CEIVE THE NOTICES, IF ANY, TO BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE AO. THEREFORE, THE NO TICES ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ISSUED TO THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE WHOSE A DDRESS IS AS UNDER:- S.C. GARG & CO. ADVOCATES 121, NOOR BUILDING, IIND FLOOR, OPPOSITE BATA SHO WROOM M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR-302 001 (RAJ.) ACCORDINGLY, THE AO SHALL PASS THE AFRESH ORDER AFT ER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/12/2017 . SD/- FOT; IKWY JKO ) (VIJAY PAUL RAO) U;KF;D LNL; @ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 /12/ 2017 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI RAM NARAYAN BUGALIYA, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- 7(2), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 875/JP/2017 ) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR