Sh. Gopal Krishan, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITSSA 1/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0199 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITSS NO.1/CHD/2013 (BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1989 TO 24.06.1999) SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN, VS THE ACIT, 1182 (OLD) 2178, RANGE-V, NEW DEEP NAGAR, LUDHIANA. GILL ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN : ABEPK5923D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING : 04.06.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.06.2014 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA D ATED 19.03.2013 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 158BC R.W.S. 158BD & 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ( 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS OF APPEA L BUT THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS VIDE GR OUND NO. 6 WHICH READS AS UNDER : THAT NO SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS AFFORDED TO THE APPELLANT TO PRESENT THE CASE BEFOR E THE WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 3. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE POINTED OUT THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH HIS BROTHER SHRI PREM PARKASH WERE SET A SIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL 2 TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) . THE PROCEEDINGS WERE TAKEN UP IN THE CASE OF THE BROTHER OF THE ASS ESSEE SHRI PREM PARKASH AND THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT DEALT BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AS THE ISSUE WAS IDENTICAL. HOWEVER, ON A LATER DATE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSE D IN-LIMINE FOR NON- PROSECUTION WHEREAS THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI PREM PARKASH WAS STILL PENDING ON THAT DATE. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE, THUS PRAYED THAT THE MATTER BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE SAME IN LINE WITH THE FINDINGS IN THE CASE OF THE BROTHER SHRI PREM PARKASH. 4. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND POINTED OU T THAT VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE AS SESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH HIS BROTHER SHRI PREM PARKASH HA D FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN ITSS 89/CHD/2005, ITSS 90/CH D/2005 AND ITSS 3/CHD/2009 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1989 TO 24.06 .1999 AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 23.10.2009 H AD REMITTED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE DENOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOW ING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD FIXED THE APPEAL OF SHRI PREM PARKASH AND VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING WERE FIXED IN THE SAID CASE AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT BEING TAKEN UP REGULARLY BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) AS THE ISSUE WAS IDENTICAL TO THE ONE RAISED IN THE CA SE OF HIS BROTHER SHRI PREM PARKASH. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILE D ON RECORD THE LIST OF 3 DATES OF HEARING WHICH RANGE FROM 05.07.2012 TO 07. 05.2013 AND EVEN REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN CALLED FOR BY THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON TWO DIFFERENT DATES. IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE ABOVESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE PRESENT ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN-LIMINE WHEREAS ON SIMILAR ISSUE, THE AP PEAL OF THE BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS STILL PENDING. BOTH THE APPEALS W ERE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BY THE TRIB UNAL VIDE CONSOLIDATED ORDER AS THE ISSUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS WERE SIMILAR. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE REMIT THE PRESENT APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS AFTER AFFORDING REASONAB LE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO. 6 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SINCE, WE ARE REMITTING THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS), WE ARE NOT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE RAISED ON MERITS. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH JUNE, 2014. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 19 TH JUNE, 2014 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHD.