Panchanan Pradhan, Khurda V. DCIT, Berhampur Circle, Berhampur

ITSSA 64/CTK/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3876 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-08-2018
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAAD KIDWAI
• Assessee Lawyers: P C SETHI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 153A; 63

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT (SS) A NO S . 63 TO 67 /CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2009 - 2010 TO 201 3 - 2014 PANCHANAN PRADHAN, KOTARI, KHANATA, BALUGAON, KHURDA. VS. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR PAN/GIR NO. AJHPP 4713 D (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : P.C.SETHI, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI SAAD KIDWAI, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 2 1 /0 8 / 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 /0 8 / 2018 O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI, AM THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR ALL DATED 20.3.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 , RESPECTIVELY. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS UNDER: IT(SS) A NO.63/CTK/2017: A.Y. 2009 - 10. 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND HAS BEEN PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS THE 2 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA IS HAVING THE JURISDICTION TO ASSESS THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 3. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT, IF ANY HAS BEEN PASSED FOR TRANSFERRING THE CASE FROM INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA TO THE LEARNED DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR THEN THE SAME WILL BE ILLEGAL AS THE OPPORTUNITY AS REQUIRED U/S 127 OF THE ACT FOR CHANGE IN PLACE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE RS HAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 127(2) OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED S ERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT IF ANY, BEFORE PROCEEDING TO ASSESSMENT BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS LIABLE TO B E QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 5. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANNEXING THE STATUTORY APPROVAL PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IF ANY AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 6. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE APPROVAL U/S 153D OF THE ACT IF ANY HAS BEEN DONE IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, RULES AND INSTRUCTION MADE THERE UNDER AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING ILLEGAL IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 7. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTE D SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IGNORING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND / OR ANNULLED. 8. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHOUT HAVING ANY MATERIALS WHATSOEVER AND FOR WHICH THE SAID ESTIMATION BEING ARBITRARY AND IS A C ASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 9. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% WHICH IS EXCESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND NOT PASSED WITHOUT HAVING ANY COMPARABLE CASE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AND RETURNED FIGURE IS TO BE ACCEPTED. 3 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 10. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS TREATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT AND LAW AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 11. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MA KING ADDITION OF RS. 5,50,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY TREATING ENTI RE RECEIPT OF RS. 5,50,000/ - AS THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE RESTRICTED TO THE PERCENTAGE OF INCOME AS DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME ON TOTAL GROSS RECEIPT. 13. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTE D SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 2,96,644/ - AS INTEREST INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 14. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERRO R IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 49,339/ - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 15. THAT, THE L EARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW. AND IN FACT FOR NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER - VI - A OF RS. 1,00,000/ - WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 16. THAT, THE LEARNED CI'T(A ) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR AS IN NOT GIVING CREDIT TO THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME. 17. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS THE LEA RNED DCIT HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271(1)(B) & 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. IT(SS) A NO.64/CTK/2017: A.Y. 2010 - 2011 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND HAS BEEN PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AN D FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 4 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA IS HAVING THE JURISDICTION TO ASSESS THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 3. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A ) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT, IF ANY HAS BEEN PASSED FOR TRANSFERRING THE CASE FROM INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA TO THE LEARNED DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR THEN THE SAME WILL BE ILLEGAL AS THE OPPORTUNITY AS REQUIRED U/S 127 OF THE ACT FOR CHANGE IN PLACE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 127(2) OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED D CIT IS ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT IF ANY, BEFORE PROCEE DING TO ASSESSMENT BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 5. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANNEXING THE STATUTORY APPROVAL PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IF ANY AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 6. THAT, T HE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE APPROVAL U/S 153D OF THE ACT IF ANY HAS BEEN DONE IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, RULES AND INSTRUCTION MADE THERE UNDER AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING ILLEGAL IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 7. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IGNORING THE RETURN OF IN COME AND FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND / OR ANNULLED. 8. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHOUT HAVING ANY MATERIALS WHATSOEVER AND FOR WHICH THE SAID ESTIMATION BEING ARBITRARY AND IS A CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 9. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET 5 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 PROFIT @ 10% WHICH IS EXCESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND NOT PASSED WITHOUT HAVING ANY COMPARABLE CASE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AND RETURNED FIGURE IS TO BE ACCEPTED. 10. THAT, THE LEARN ED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS TREATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT AND LAW AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 11. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1,17,02,683/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12. TH AT THE CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING BY ESTIMATING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT 1% ON TOTAL TRANSACTION OF ALLEGED SHARE/COMMODITIES TRANSACTIONS WHICH IS NOT ONLY ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE BUT ALSO CONTRARY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE ENTIRE ESTIMATE IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 1 3 . THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY TREATING ENTIRE RECEIPT OF RS. 3,00,00 ,000/ - AS THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE RESTRICTED TO THE PERCENTAGE OF INCOME AS DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME ON TOTAL GROSS RECEIPT. 1 4 . THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1,35,534 / - AS INTEREST INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 1 5 . THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 5,89,073 / - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 1 6 . THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.93,701/ - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 1 7 . THAT, THE LEARNED CI'T(A) HAS COMMITT ED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT ALLOWING THE DE DUCTION AS THE LD DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT FOR NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI - A OF RS.1,00,000/ - WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 18. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUAS HING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271(1)(B) & 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 6 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 IT(SS) A NO.65/CTK/2017: A.Y. 201 1 - 2012 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND HAS BEEN PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATIO N TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS THE I NCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA IS HAVING THE JURISDICTION TO ASSESS THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND /OR ANNULLED. 3. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT, IF ANY HAS BEEN PASSED FOR TRANSFERRING THE CASE FROM INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA TO THE LEARNED DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR THEN THE SAME WILL BE ILLEGAL AS THE OPPORTUNITY AS REQUIRED U/S 127 OF THE ACT FOR CHANGE IN PLACE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 127(2) OF THE ACT AND FO R WHICH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT IF ANY, BEFORE PROCEEDING TO ASSESSMENT BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 5. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANNEXING THE STATUTORY APPROVAL PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IF ANY AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 6. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE APPROVAL U/S 153D OF THE ACT IF ANY HAS BEEN DONE IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, RULES AND INSTRUCTION MADE THERE UNDER AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING ILLEGAL IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 7. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IGNORING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE T O BE QUASHED AND / OR ANNULLED. 7 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 8. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHOUT HAVING ANY MATERIALS WHATSOEVER AND FOR WHICH THE SAID ESTIMATION BEING ARBITRARY AND IS A CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 9. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% WHICH IS EXC ESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND NOT PASSED WITHOUT HAVING ANY COMPARABLE CASE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AND RETURNED FIGURE IS TO BE ACCEPTED. 10. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS TREATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT AND LAW AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 11. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 39,16,998/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12. THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING BY ESTIMATING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT 1% ON TOTAL TRANSACTION OF ALLEGED SHARE/COMMODITIES TRANSACTIONS WHICH IS NOT ONLY ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE BUT ALSO CONTRARY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE ENTIRE ESTIMATE IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 13. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DE LETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 5,45,440/ - AS INTEREST INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 14. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADD ITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1,36,272/ - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 15. THAT, THE LEARNED CI'T(A) HAS COM MITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION AS THE LD DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT FOR NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI - A OF RS.1,00,000/ - WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 16. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR AS IN N OT GIVING CREDIT TO THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME. 17. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY 8 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 PROCEEDIN G U/S 271(1)(B) & 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. IT(SS) A NO.66/CTK/2017: A.Y. 2012 - 13 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND HAS BEEN PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA IS HAVING THE JURISDICTION TO ASSESS THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 3. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHIN G THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT, IF ANY HAS BEEN PASSED FOR TRANSFERRING THE CASE FROM INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA TO THE LEARNED DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR THEN THE SAME WILL BE ILLEGAL AS THE OPPORTUNITY AS REQUI RED U/S 127 OF THE ACT FOR CHANGE IN PLACE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 127(2) OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT IF ANY, BEFORE PROCEEDING TO ASSESSMENT BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 5. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANNEXING THE STATUTORY APPROVAL PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IF ANY AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 6. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE APPROVAL U/S 153D OF THE ACT IF ANY HAS BEEN DONE IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, RULES AND INSTRUCTION MADE THERE UNDER AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING ILLEGAL IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 7. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IGNORING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE T O BE QUASHED AND / OR ANNULLED. 9 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 8. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHOUT HAVING ANY MATERIALS WHATSOEVER AND FOR WHICH THE SAID ESTIMATION BEING ARBITRARY AND IS A CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 9. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% WHICH IS EXC ESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND NOT PASSED WITHOUT HAVING ANY COMPARABLE CASE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AND RETURNED FIGURE IS TO BE ACCEPTED. 10. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED D CIT HAS TREATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT AND LAW AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 11. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED D CIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.4,77,967/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LD DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW A ND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.1,16,098/ - AS INTEREST INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 13. THAT, THE LEARNED CI'T(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION AS THE LD DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT FOR N OT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI - A OF RS.57,715/ - WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 14. THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT GIVING CREDIT TO THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME. 1 5 . THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S 271(1)(B) & 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. IT(SS) A NO.67/CTK/2017: A.Y. 2013 - 14. 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND HAS BEEN PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 10 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT WHICH IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AS THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD , KHURDA IS HAVING THE JURISDICTION TO ASSESS THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 3. THAT, THE LE ARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT, IF ANY HAS BEEN PASSED FOR TRANSFERRING THE CASE FROM INCOME - TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA TO THE LEARNED DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR TH EN THE SAME WILL BE ILLEGAL AS THE OPPORTUNITY AS REQUIRED U/S 127 OF THE ACT FOR CHANGE IN PLACE OF JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICERS HAS NOT GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 127(2) OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE THE ORDER U/S 127 OF THE ACT IF ANY, BEFORE PROCEEDING TO ASSESSMENT BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R PASSED BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 5. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT ANNEXING THE STATUTORY APPROVAL PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IF ANY AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 6. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE APPROVAL U/S 153D OF THE ACT IF ANY HAS BEEN DONE IN GROSS VIOLATION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, RULES AND INSTRUCTION MADE THERE UNDER AND FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEING ILLEGAL IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 7. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IGNORING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT IS ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND / OR ANNULLED. 8. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE NOTICE U/S.142(1) OF THE ACT DATED 30.3.2014 IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AS FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR THE APPELLANT HAS ALREA DY FILED THE RETURN U/S.139 OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSMENT MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE SAID NOTICE U/S.142(1) OF THE ACT IS ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 11 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 9. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE NOTICE U/S.143(2) OF THE ACT IS PER SE ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. 10. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE LD DCIT HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.144 OF THE ACT WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND/OR ANNULLED. . 11. THAT, THE LEARNED C1T(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTI MATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHOUT HAVING ANY MATERIALS WHATSOEVER AND FOR WHICH THE SAID ESTIMATION BEING ARBITRARY AND IS A CASE OF NON APPLICATION OF MIND IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12. THAT, THE LEARNED C1T(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ESTIMATION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT @ 10% WHICH IS EXCESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND NOT PASSED WITHOUT HAVING ANY COMPARABLE CASE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AN D RETURNED FIGURE IS TO BE ACCEPTED. 13. THAT, THE LEARNED C1T(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS TREATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT AND LAW AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 14. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 70,000/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 15. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADD I TION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 3,05.751/ - AS UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY FOUND DURING TIE SEARCH AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 16. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 17,18,079/ - AS UNEXPLAINED BANK BALANCE AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 17. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 17,18,079/ - WITHOUT HAVING ANY REASON WHATSOEVER AND HAS DONE IN A MECHANICAL MANNER WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 18.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOT H IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1,88,421/ - AS INTEREST INCOME AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 12 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 19. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT DELETING THE ADDITION AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 36,036/ - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCE WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 20. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION AS THE LE ARNED DCIT HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND IN FACT FOR NOT ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER - VI - A OF RS. 1,00,000/ - WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 21.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR AS IN NOT GIVING CREDIT TO THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WH ICH IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME. 22. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS THE LEARNED DCIT HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S.271(1)(B) & 271 AAA OF THE ACT WHICH IS A CLEAR CASE OF NON - APPLICATION OF MIND AND FOR WHICH SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED EXPARTE ORDER AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING ON 17.10.2016, 8.11.2016, 2.12.2016, 9.1.2017, 9.2.2017, 1.3.2017 AND 14.3.2017. IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT HE UNDERTAKES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND FULLY CO - OPERATE WIT H HIM IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. LD D.R. VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE FOR GRANTING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO, THERE WAS NON - COMPLIANCE AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CAME TO BE PASSED U/S.153A/144 OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE 13 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 IS HABITUAL DEFAULTER AND, THEREFORE, SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT NOTIC ES OF HEARING FIXING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE CIT(A) WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND COMPLY WITH HIS REQUISITION SO THAT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE COULD BE DISPOSED OF BY HIM ON ME RITS CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN AN UNDERTAKING IN THE COURT TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND FULLY CO - OPERATE WITH HIM IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS EXPED ITIOUSLY. 5. LD D.R. HAS OPPOSED THE PLEA OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TO RENDER SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, AN OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO HIM. HOWEVER, WE ARE ALIVE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITIES ALLOWED TO HIM BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(A). HENCE, WE IMPOSE A COST OF RS.5,000/ - FOR EACH YEAR ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO DEPOSIT THE COST WI THIN 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER AND FILE COPY OF THE 14 IT(SS)A NOS.63 TO 67/CTK/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009 - 2010 TO 2013 - 2014 CHALLAN WITH THE CIT(A) AND ALSO A COPY OF THE SAME TO THE TRIBUNAL. THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE GROUNDS O F APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 21 /0 8 /2018. S D/ - SD/ - ( PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ( N.S SAINI) JUDICIALMEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 21 /0 8 /2018 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : PANCHANAN PRADHAN, KOTARI, KHANATA, BALUGAON, KHURDA 2. THE RESPONDENT. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR 3. THE CIT(A) - 1, BHUBANESWAR 4. PR.CIT - 1, BHUBANESWAR 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//