Shri Naveen Rungta, Kolkata V. DCIT, Ranchi

ITSSA 17/RAN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3781 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT (SS) A NO S . 16 & 17 /RAN/201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 SHRI NAV EEN RUNGTA, 301, MANGALAM BUILDIG, 21, HEMANT BASU SARANI, KOLKATA - 700001 VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RANCHI PAN/GIR NO. ADJPR 8294 F (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI ANAND KUMAR PANDEY, ADV REVENUE BY : SHRI DEEPAK KU SUTARIYA, CIT (A), JAMSHEDPUR DATE OF HEARING : 21/05 / 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 /05/ 2018 O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI, AM THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A) - 3 PATNA, DATED 15.3.2016 , F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 - 06 AND 2006 - 07 , RESPECTIVELY. 2. IN IT(SS) A NO.16 ,PAT/2016, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 2 IT(SS)A NOS.16 & 17 /RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 1. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) PATNA HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS, BY UPHOLDING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.153A R.W.S.143(3) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1 961. 2. BECAUSE THE CIT(A HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ,BY UPHOLDING THE CENTRALISATION OF THE APPELLANT CASE IN CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RANCHI. 3. BECAUSE THE CIT(A HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ,BY UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS .35,00,000 / - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOM E. 3. IN IT(SS) A NO.17 /RAN/2016, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. BECAUSE THE CIT(A) PATNA HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS, BY UPHOLDING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.153A R.W.S.143(3) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. 2. BEC AUSE THE CIT(A HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ,BY UPHOLDING THE CENTRALISATION OF THE APPELLANT CASE IN CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RANCHI. 3. BECAUSE THE CIT(A HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS ,BY UPHOLD ING THE ADDITION OF RS.24,75,100 / - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 4 . AT THE OUTSET, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE CIT(A)S ORDER S FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ADJOURNED THE APPEALS FOR HEARING CONSIDERING THE TIME PETITION S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ON FIV E OCCASIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED FOR GRANT OF SOME MORE DAYS FOR PREPARATION OF DETAILS , WHICH WAS ALSO ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A). HOWEVER, DESPITE ALLOWING VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES BY THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR, THEREFORE, THE APPEALS WERE D ISMISSED . 5. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW FILED APPEAL S BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. WHEN QUESTIONED BY THE BENCH WHAT WERE THE REASONS FOR NON - COMPLIANCE OF NOTICE OF HEARING AND REQUEST OF MORE TIMES FOR PREPARATION OF 3 IT(SS)A NOS.16 & 17 /RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 DETAILS, LD A.R. COULD NOT GIVE ANY SATISFACTORY REPLY FOR THE SAME BUT PRAYED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS C ASE BEFORE THE CIT(A) . 7. LD D.R. VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE GRANTING OF ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT SUFF ICIENT OPPORTUN ITIES HAVE BEEN ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME AND, THEREFORE, NO MERCY SHOULD BE SHOWN TO THE ASSESSEE AT THIS STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS. 8. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATE RIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IN ORDER TO RENDER SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, ALL MATERIALS FACTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT ON RECORD TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSU E. FOR DOING S O, AN OPPORTUNITY HAS TO BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, WE ARE ALIVE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN A HABITUAL DEFAULTER IN COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT(A). 9. LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN BEFORE US THAT IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE WILL DEFINITELY APP EAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND PRESENT HIS CASE. KEEPING THIS UNDERTAKING OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW IN THE OPEN COURT, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER S OF THE CIT(A) A ND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL S AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, WE ARE OF THE 4 IT(SS)A NOS.16 & 17 /RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 VIEW THAT THE COST SHOULD BE LEVIED ON THE ASSESSEE FOR WASTING VALUABLE T IME OF THE CIT (A) AS WELL AS THAT OF THE TRIBUNAL. KEEPING IN V IEW THIS FACT, WE IMPOSE COST OF RS.10,000/ - ON THE ASSESSEE TO BE DEPOSITED ON OR BEFORE 31.5.2018. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PRE SENT PROOF OF PAYMENT OF COST BEFORE THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS FILE A COPY OF THE SAME TO THE TRIBUNAL FOR COMPLIANCE TO THIS ORDER. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT ON 11 /05 /201 8 SD/ - SD/ - (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N.S SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER RANCHI; DATED 22 /05 /201 8 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PS, ITAT, CAMP AT RANCHI 1. THE APPELLANT : SHRI NAVEEN RUNGTA, 301, MANGALAM BUILDIG, 21, HEMANT BASU SARANI, KOLKATA - 700001 2. THE RESPONDENT: DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RANCHI , 3. THE CIT(A), PATNA 4. PR. CIT , 5. DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//