M/S. Prime Products Limited, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(4), Kanpur

ITSSA 600/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5267 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MADHUK
• Section: 153A; 153C; 10

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 598, 599, 600 & 601/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2009 - 10 , 2010 - 11, 2011 - 12 & 2013 - 14 M/S PRIME PRODUCTS LTD. 87/8, KALPI ROAD KANPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(4) KANPUR TAN/PAN: AAACP8239K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI ASHISH JAISWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S. K. MADHUK, CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 20 02 20 20 DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT: 20 02 20 20 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: THESE ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II, KANPUR, ALL DATED 11/6/2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, TAKING IDENTICAL GROUNDS, EXCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE. FOR THE SAKE OF REFERENCE, WE REPRODUCE BELOW THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN NOT PROVIDING PROPER AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING AND PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING ANY FINDING ON MERIT. 2. THAT THE AUTHORIZATION ITSELF IS INVALID AS NOTHING INCRIMINATING WAS UNEARTHED DURING THE SEARCH IN THE CASE OF HARISH CHANDRA JAISWAL AND OTHER RELATED CONCERN. ITA NOS.598, 599, 600 & 601/LKW/2018 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED AND ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS INVALID AND UNLAWFUL WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 4. THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS WITHOUT THE SATISFACTION AS REQUIRED UNDER THE PROVISION OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 5. THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS NOT BASED UPON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AND SURVEY WITH THE SEARCHED PERSON UNDER SECTION 153A OR THE APPELLANT COMPANY. 6. THAT THE INITIATION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS INVALID AND UNLAWFUL. 7. THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.74,030/-BEING INCIDENTAL EXPENSES TO EARN INCOME. 8. THAT THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS ARBITRARY PREJUDICIAL AND UNLAWFUL. 9. THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. 2. BY VIRTUE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEALS FOR NON-PROSECUTION, OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING HIS OWN APPEALS. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ISSUED TWO NOTICES, DATED 19/2/2018 AND 10/4/2018, THROUGH OFFICIAL INCOME TAX BUSINESS APPLICATION (ITBA NETWORK), FIXING THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE ON 13/3/2018 AND 18/4/2018 , BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). SUCH SERVICE OF NOTICES HAS, HOWEVER, BEEN DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. HEARD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEALS WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. MOREOVER, HE HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL AFTER DISCUSSING IN ITA NOS.598, 599, 600 & 601/LKW/2018 PAGE 3 OF 3 DETAIL, HIS REASONS FOR AGREEING WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING REQUIRES TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE FULLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). EVEN OTHERWISE, IT IS TRITE ['S. VELU PALANDAR VS. DCIT' 83 ITR 683 (MAD.) AND 'MS. SWATI PAWA VS. DY. CIT', 175 ITD 622 (DEL)] AND INCUMBENT ON THE LD CIT(A) TO DECIDE AN APPEAL ON MERIT EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION BEFORE THEM. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED AFRESH ON MERIT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ON AFFORDING DUE AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE, NO DOUBT, SHALL COOPERATE IN THE FRESH PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ALL PLEAS AVAILABLE UNDER THE LAW SHALL REMAIN SO AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEALS ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/02/2020. SD/ - SD/ - [T. S. KAP OOR] [A. D. JAIN] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED:20/02/2020 JJ:2002 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR