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. 23 /RAN/201 6 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2008 - 09 D CIT, CIRCLE, JAM SHEDPUR VS. SRI MANOHAR LAL PAUL , 266/A - 5, LOWER VIDYAPATI NAGAR, KANKE ROAD, RANCHI. PAN/GIR NO. HSPP 6319 A (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI S.PODDAR/DEVESH PODDAR, ARS REVENUE BY : SHRI DEEPAK KR. S U TARIYA, CIT(A), JAMSHEDPUR DATE OF HEARING : 21/05 / 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 /05/ 2018 O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI, AM THIS IS AN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 3 PATNA, DATED 17 .2.2016 , F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE CIT(A) PATNA HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACT BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,80,00,000/ - MADE ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS SEIZED DURING THE TIME OF SEARCH. 2. THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THE FACTS OF ANNEXURE OF PIL NO. 4700 OF 08 FILED BY SRI DURGA ORAON WHEREIN IT IS CLEARLY NOTED THAT MANOHARJI 480/ - . 2. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS BARRED BY 19 DAYS. THE REVENUE HAS FILED CONDONATION PETITION DATED 25.5.2016 ALONGWITH APPEAL MEMO FOR 2 IT(SS)A NOS.11 & 12/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 & 2007 - 08 CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE CONDONATION PETITION, WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE HAD REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME. WE, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DELAY OF 19 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL A ND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. LD D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.4.80 CRORES TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION OF THE SAID AMOUNT WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS AND SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION OF THE SAME AMOUNT WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF SHRI MADHU KODA, EX. CHIEF MINISTER. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF SHRI MADHU KODA IS PENDING BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE ARGUED THAT TILL THE APPEAL IN THE CASE IN WHICH SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION WAS MADE IS NOT DECIDED BY THE CIT(A), THE CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL WHERE THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. HE PRAYED FOR RESTORATION OF THIS APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 5. LD A.R. DID NOT DISPUTE THE ABOVE PROPOSITION OF LD D.R. AND AGREED TO THE SAME. 6. IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THIS APPEAL BACK TO HIS FILE TO BE DECIDED 3 IT(SS)A NOS.11 & 12/RAN/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 & 2007 - 08 AFRESH AFTER DISPOSAL OF APPEAL BY THE CIT(A) IN THE CASE WHERE SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE. 7. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE PROVIDED TO BOTH THE PARTIES BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8 . IN THE RESUL T , APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 /05 /201 8 SD/ - SD/ - (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N.S SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER RANCHI; DATED 23 /05 /201 8 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PS, ITAT, CAMP AT RANCHI 1. THE APPELLANT : DCIT, CIRCLE1, RANCHI, 2. THE RESPONDENT: SRI MANOHAR LAL PAUL, 266/A - 5, LOWER VIDYAPATI NAGAR, KANKE ROAD, RANCHI 3. THE CIT(A), PATNA 4. PR. CIT , 5. DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//