IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 851/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S DOLFIN RUBBER LTD., V ACIT, CC REGD.OFFICE 79/1-H, LUDHIANA. SARABHA NAGAR, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACD-5798B & ITA NO. 925/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DCIT, CC-II, V M/S DOLFIN RUBBERS LTD., LUDHIANA. SIHARA MARKET.ST.NO.2, DASHMESH NAGAR, LUDHIANA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DEEPAK AGGARWAL DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI DATE OF HEARING : 14.06.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.06.2012 ORDER PER T.R.SOOD, AM THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE AND SOME OF THE ISSUES RAISED ARE COMMON. THEREFORE , THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY TH IS COMMON ORDER. 2. IN ADDITION TO THE NORMAL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE, THE FOLLOWING ADDITION AL GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUND RAISED BEFORE HIM 2 QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 153B WHEREIN THE GROUND RAISED READS AS 'THAT THE LD. A.O. HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN MAKING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) R.W. 153B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1967 AS IT IS NOT A CASE COVERED BY SEARCH OPERATION U/S 132(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961' 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISPOSI NG THE GROUND, RAISED FOR VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, BY SAYING THE SAID GROUND AS GENERAL IN NATURE AND FOR WHICH NO SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION IS NECESSARY WHEREAS AS PER THE ASSESSEE THE DISPOSAL OF GROUND RAISED IN AN APPEAL IS ONEROUS DUTY OF THE LD. CIT(A) BEING A JUDICIAL AUTHORITY. 3. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT ADDI TIONAL GROUNDS ARE PURELY OF LEGAL NATURE AND THEREFORE, S AME ARE ADMITTED. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE THAT THIS ISSUE WAS RAISED BEFORE CIT(A) AS GROUND NO.2 AND THE SAME HAS BEEN HELD TO BE OF GENERAL NATURE, WHI CH IS NOT CORRECT. AFTER SOME ARGUMENTS, BOTH THE PARTIES AG REED THAT THIS ISSUE NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY CIT(A) AND THERE FORE, OTHER ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVE NUE MAY ALSO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). 4. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THA T LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT(A) AS GROU ND NO.2, WOULD GO TO THE ROOT OF THE ASSESSMENT. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ADJUDICATED THIS ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY, W E SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE SAME TO H IS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE ALL THE ISSUES AGAIN , AFTER 3 ADJUDICATING LEGAL ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE VIDE GR OUND NO.2 BEFORE HIM AND AS PER ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RAISED BEF ORE US. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND OF THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND JUNE,2012. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (T.R.SOOD) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 22 ND JUNE,2012. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT ,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH