, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK ( ) BEFORE . . , , HONBLE SHRI K.K.GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. /AND . . . , HONBLE SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I.T (SS) A.NO S . 07 AND 38/CTK/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 - 06 AND 2003 - 04) MA N A S RANJAN MOHANTY, PLOT NO.1680, NILAKANTHA NAGAR, BHUBANESWAR PAN: AHCPM 5298 B - - - VERSUS - ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), BHUBANESWAR ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / FOR THE APPELLANT : / SHRI B.K.DAS, AR / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SHRI MATI . PARAMITA TRIPATHY, CIT - DR / DATE OF HEARING: 12.07.2012 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14.08.2012 / ORDER . . . , , SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER . THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 - 06 AND 2003 - 04 RESPEC TIVELY HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE RESPECTIVE CIT(A)S ORDERS. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUNDS IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS . 1. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS CAPRICIOUS, INVALID, ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CI T (APPEAL) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACTS WHILE DISMISSING THE APPELLANT PLEA OF WRONG INITIATION OF PROCEEDING U/S 153C INCOME TAX ACT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) HAS WRONGLY REJECTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE HIM WITHOUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT T HE MATERIALITY OF SUCH EVIDENCE. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT FOR CALCULATION OF ITS INCOME OF THE YEAR WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. I.T(SS)A.NOS. 07 AND 38/CTK/2012 2 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO AMEND, MODIFY, OBL IGE, ADD TO OR RESIGNED ANY OR ALL OF THE ABOVE GROUND. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL GROUND S, WHICH IS COMMON IN BOTH THE AYS, ALONG WITH A PETITION FOR ACCEPTING AND ADJUDICATING THE SAME. 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE HIM ON MERIT WHEN THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE APPELLANT ON 07.02.2008 I.E., 38 DAYS AFTER THE PERIOD OF LIM ITATION. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERIT REGARDING THE DELAY IN SERVICE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER REJECTING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO BE ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE CASE. 3. THAT, THE LEARNE D CIT (A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN NOT QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED ON A NOTICE ISSUED U/S 153C OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS THE ACT) WITHOUT HAVING ANY SATISFACTION THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND DOCUME NTS IS COMING WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 132(1) READ WITH SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. 4. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN QUESTIONING THE PROPRIETY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WHICH IS BEYOND THE JUDIC IAL DECORUM AND DISCIPLINE AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) DISMISSED THE GROUNDS ON THE BASIS OF SAID REASONS FOR WHICH THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS LIABLE TO BE DECLARED AS ILLEGAL AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. SINCE THE ADDITIONAL GROU NDS GO TO ROOT OF THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF IN VIEW OF THE CHALLENGE OF THE TIME BARRING OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WE HAVE HEARD REGARDING THE ADMISSION OF THE SAME. ON HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERE D VIEW THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOW RAISING THE ASPECT OF ASSESSMENT ORDERS HAVING BEEN BARRED BY LIMITATION BUT AT THE SAME TIME THIS ISSUE WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) BUT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DISPOSED OF THESE GROUNDS . ON GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALSO WE FIND THAT I.T(SS)A.NOS. 07 AND 38/CTK/2012 3 THIS ISSUE WAS NOT RAISED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE THE ADDITIONAL ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS GOING TO THE ROOT OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THIS ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN RAISED BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER AND WAS NOT DEALT WITH BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) THOUGH PLEADED BEFORE HIM, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THESE ARE FIT CASES TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND PLEADED BY THE ASSESSEE B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS STATED SUPRA AND PASS THE ORDERS AS PER LAW OF COURSE STRICTLY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, THESE MATTERS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS INDICATED SUPRA. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE STATISTICALLY ALLOWED. S D/ - S D/ - ( . . ) , , (K.K.GUPTA), ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( . . . ) , (K.S.S.PRASAD RAO), JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) DATE: 14.08.2012 - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . / THE APPELLANT : 2 / THE RESPONDENT: 3 . / THE CIT, 4 . ( )/ THE C IT(A), 5 . / DR, CUTTACK BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . / TRUE COPY, / BY ORDER, ( ), (H.K.PADHEE), SENIOR.PRIVATE SECRETARY. I.T(SS)A.NOS. 07 AND 38/CTK/2012 4 APPENDIX XVII SEAL TO BE AFFIXED ON THE ORDER SHEET BY THE SR. P.S./P.S. AFTER DICTATION IS GIVEN 1. DATE OF DICTATION 07.08.2012 . 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 08.08.201 2 OTHER MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S 14.08.2012 . 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 14.08.2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE O N THE ORDER ................ 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..