Sh. Surinder Singh, Jalandhar V. The Income tax Officer, Jalandhar

MA 24/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1585 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIK CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: Y K SUD
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 131; 54

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.24(ASR)/2014 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.492(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :ABNPS8324B SH.SURINDER SINGH, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 214, GURU GOBIND SINGH NAGAR, WARD-III(2), NEAR GURU TEG BAHADUR NAGAR, JALANDHAR. JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH.Y.K. SUD, CA RESPONDENT BY:SH.AMRIK CHAND, DR DATE OF HEARING: 28/03/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:31/03/2014 ORDER PER BENCH ; THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AR ISES FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 09.12.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.4 92(ASR)/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 .THE MISC. APPLICATION FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IS READ AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE ORDER IN THE ABOVE SAID APPEAL WAS PAS SED BY BENCH ON 19.12.2013. MA NO.24(ASR)/2014 2 2. PERUSAL TO THE ORDER UNDER REFERENCE REVEALS A M ISTAKE THAT IN ARA 7.5 OF THE ORDER ALTHOUGH THERE IS A FINDING GIVEN BY THE BENCH THAT THOUGH THERE IS NO AGITATION BY THE REVENUE WITH REGARD TO THE DELETION BY THE LD. CIT(A) OF RS.6.20 LACS AFTER SU STAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.4.80 LACS BEING PEAK AMOUNT AND THE REFORE, WE DO NOT COMMENT ON THE SAME. HOWEVER, IT IS WELL SETTLED LAW THAT THE HONBLE T RIBUNAL HAS NO POWER TO ENHANCE THE ASSESSED INCOME AFTER GIVING A RELIEF BY THE CIT(A). TRIBUNAL CANNOT PUT THE ASSESSEE IN AN ADVERSE SITUATION THAN THE STATE WHEN THE ASSESSEE APPROACH ED THE ITAT. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE CIT(A) HAS REDUCED THE ADDI TION OF RS.11 LACS TO RS.4.80 LACS WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE, THEREFORE, A FINDING ALSO SHOULD BE GIVEN BY THE BE NCH THAT WHILE RE-EXAMINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 11 LACS U/S 69A, IN CASE THE AO IS NOT SATISFIED THE ADDITION IS TO BE RESTR ICTED TO RS.4.80 LACS. 3. THAT THE SIMILAR SITUATION AROSE BEFORE THE CHAN DIGARH BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF H.P. STATE FOREST CORPN. LTD. W HERE THE M.A. OF THE ASSESSEE ( COPY ENCLOSED) WAS ALLOWED BY THE BENCH. 2. THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN PARA 7. 5 OF OUR ORDER DATED 19.12.20013. THE MATTER HAS BEEN ARGUED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, WHICH HAS BEEN HEARD AND AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE R ECTIFY OUR ORDER DATED 09.12.2013 IN PARA 7.5 WHICH HAS TO BE READ, AS UN DER: 7.5. AS REGARDS THE DOUBTS RAISED IN THE MIND OF T HE AO WITH REGARD TO THE IKRARNAMA, THE POWER VESTS WITH THE AO U/S 131 OF THE ACT TO SUMMON THE SELLER AND THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY AND THE AO WAS MA NO.24(ASR)/2014 3 WITHIN HIS POWER TO SUMMON THOSE PARTIES TO CLARIFY HIS DOUBTS WHICH WAS NOT DONE IN THIS CASE. IT WAS TOO EARLY TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN SOLD OR PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS ALSO REQUIRES AN EXAMINATION BY THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW. THOUGH THERE IS NO AGITATION BY THE REVENUE WITH REGARD TO THE D ELETION BY THE LD. CIT(A) OF RS.6.20 LACS AFTER SUSTAINING THE ADDITIO N OF RS.4.80 LACS BEING PEAK AMOUNT AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT COMMENT ON THE SAME. IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IF THE MATTER I S SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE OW NERSHIP OF THE BANK A/C WITH IDBI BANK LTD. AND THAT OF SALES AND PURCHASES OF VARIOUS PROPERTIES AND THE EXEMPTION U/S 54 & 54F, WHO WILL DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF OUR DIRECTIONS HER EINABOVE, AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. AFTER EXAMINING THE ISSUE, IF THE AO MAKES ANY ADD ITION, THE SAME SHOULD NOT EXCEED RS.4.80 LACS SINCE THE ASSESSEE H AS ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED RELIEF OF RS.6.20 LACS AND THE REVENUE IS N OT IN APPEAL BEFORE US AS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. THE AO. IS DIRECTED TO ACT ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE M.A.NO.24(ASR)/2014 OF THE AS SESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31ST MARCH, 2014. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31ST MARCH, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH.SURINDER SINGH, JALANDHAR. 2. THE ITO WARD III(2), JALANDHAR. 3. THE CIT(A), JALANDHAR. 4. THE CIT, JALANDHAR. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER