V.Heerachand Jain, Tindivanam V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITSSA 12/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0303 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C V PAVANA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Block assessment
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A BE NCH, CHENNAI . , ' # , $ % BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER STAY PETITION NO.190 /MDS/2014 & IT(SS)A NO.12/MDS/2014 (IN IT(SS)A NO.12/MDS/2014) (BLOCK ASSESSMENT : 01.04.96 TO 31.03.2002, 01.04.2 002 TO 22.01.2003) MR. V.HEERACHAND JAIN, 13A, KRISHNAAPPA PILLAI STREET TINDIVANAM. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-II(3), CHENNAI-34. PAN: AACPJ2330G ( PETITIONER ) RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MR. N.DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MR. C.V.PAVANAKUMAR, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THE ASSESSEE FILED STAY PETITION REQUESTING TO GR ANT STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED DEMAND OF ` 95,45,271/-. 2. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE PRESEN T DEMAND OF ` 95,45,271/- AROSE ON ACCOUNT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER GIVING EFFECT TO TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF S.P.NO.190 /MDS/2014 & IT (SS)A.NO.12/MDS/2014 2 THE ACT. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL. THE COUNSEL FURT HER SUBMITS THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) D ID NOT DISPOSE OFF THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON JU RISDICTION IN PASSING THE ORDER BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE REFORE, COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT SINCE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OP PORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND SINCE HE HAS NOT DISPOSED OFF O NE OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE I.E ON JURISDICTION, COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED TO THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 3. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE OPPOSED FOR GRANT OF STAY AND SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND NO INFORMA TION WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE INFORMATION REGARDING ADDITIONS MADE. S.P.NO.190 /MDS/2014 & IT (SS)A.NO.12/MDS/2014 3 4. IN REPLY, COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS NOT SERVED THE NOTICE OF LAST HEARING ON THE ASSESSEE AND PASSED T HE ORDER. AS FAR AS THE FINANCIAL POSITION IS CONCERNED, COUN SEL SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO PAY HUGE DEMA ND RAISED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. ON HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PASSED THE ORD ER DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DID NOT ADJUDI CATE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON JURISDICTION IN P ASSING THE ORDER BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE ALSO SUBMITS THAT NO PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ON A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), WE DO NOT FIND ANY MENTION ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY GIVEN BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSE E EXCEPT ON ONE OCCASION I.E. 21.10.2013 WHERE THE AS SESSEE ATTENDED FOR HEARING AND THERE IS NO MENTION ABOUT DATES OF S.P.NO.190 /MDS/2014 & IT (SS)A.NO.12/MDS/2014 4 HEARING THEREAFTER AND OPPORTUNITY GIVEN TO THE ASS ESSEE TILL THE ORDER WAS PASSED ON 28.2.2014. IN THE CIRCUMST ANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT APPEAL SHOULD BE HEARD BY T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AFTER GIVING A DEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ONE MORE REASON FOR RE MANDING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS) IS THAT APPARENTLY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DID NOT DISPOSE OFF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER I N PASSING THE ORDER. THUS, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER A ND REMIT THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL AFRESH. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE WILL CO-OPERATE WITH THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE H IM IN DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL. 6. SINCE WE HAVE REMITTED THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FI LE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS AND DISMISSED AS S UCH. S.P.NO.190 /MDS/2014 & IT (SS)A.NO.12/MDS/2014 5 7. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, THE 15 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- . ( ' %& ' ) ( A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( CHALLA NAGEN DRA PRASAD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / ) JUDICIAL MEMBER/ %+ ) % /CHENNAI, , /DATED, 15 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 SOMU '+/0 20 /COPY TO: 1.APPLICANT 2. '35 /RESPONDENT 3. 6 () /CIT(A) 4. 6 /CIT 5. 0 '++: /DR 6. = /GF