Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Sanjay Anandray Bhatt, Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax on 30 June, 2015
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'ए ए' अहमदाबाद।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ./ ITA No. 1714/Ahd/2011 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 ITO, V/s. Shri Sanjay Anandray Bhatt Ward-14(3), 97, Patel Society, Opp.
Ahmedabad Samratnagar, Nr. Indira
Bridge, Hansol, Ahmedabad
PAN : ACFPB 1144 H
अपीलाथ /
अपीलाथ / (Appellant) ू!यथ
यथ /
थ / (Respondent)
Revenue by : Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. DR.
Assessee(s) by : Shri S.N. Divatia, AR
सुनवाई क$ तार&ख/
/ Dateof Hearing : 29/06/2015
घोषणा क$ तार&ख / Date of Pronouncement: 30/06/2015
आदे श/O R D E R
PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT:
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XXI, Ahmedabad dated 21.04.2011, pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09.
2. In this appeal by the Revenue, following grounds were raised:-
1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80C of Rs.98,044/-, cash credit of Rs.17,14,600/- and agricultural income of Rs.7,45,000/- treated as undisclosed income from other sources.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) has not passed any speaking order which is against the principle of natural justice.
3. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to take into consideration the grounds and legal position as discussed by the AO in the assessment order dated ITA No. 1714/Ahd/2011 ITO vs. Shri Sanjay Anandray Bhatt For AY 2008-09 2 27.12.2010 and neither has given any opportunity of hearing to AO which is against the principle of natural justice.
4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary.
5. It is therefore prayed that the order of the learned CIT(A) may be cancelled and that the order of the Assessing Officer be restored.
3. At the time of hearing before us, it was pointed out by the ld. Departmental Representative that the assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer and did not produce any explanation or evidence before the Assessing Officer. That, before the CIT(A), the assessee explained all the three additions made by the Assessing Officer and also produced the necessary evidences for explaining the cash deposited in bank, evidence of LIC payment, etc. That the CIT(A) deleted the additions without calling for any remand report from the Assessing Officer. He, therefore, submitted that the order of the CIT(A) should be reversed and that of Assessing Officer may be restored.
4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee could not appear before the Assessing Officer, as he was travelling a lot because of personal reasons. He, therefore, entrusted the issue of appearance before the Assessing Officer to his Chartered Accountant, Shri Mukesh Ajbani. Shri Mukesh Ajbani has assured the assessee that he has appeared before the Assessing Officer and has also furnished the details and information as required. He, therefore, submitted that no fresh evidence was in fact submitted before the CIT(A) as all the evidences were duly submitted before the Assessing Officer, though he has not considered the same. He was fair enough to admit that the CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order giving the detailed reason for deleting the addition and summarily deleted all the additions relying upon the assessee's written ITA No. 1714/Ahd/2011 ITO vs. Shri Sanjay Anandray Bhatt For AY 2008-09 3 submissions. He submitted that in the written submissions, the assessee has duly explained the cash deposited in bank, about the eligibility of the assessee for deduction u/s 80C and the correctness of the agricultural income disclosed. He, therefore, submitted that either the order of the CIT(A) should be sustained or the matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. He also stated that in all probability the evidences furnished by the assessee should be available on the record of the Assessing Officer, but even if the evidences are not available, the assessee would furnish all the evidences and explanation again before the Assessing Officer.
5. After considering the facts of the case and the arguments of both the sides, in our opinion, it would meet the ends of justice if the order of the authorities below are set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer. We order accordingly, and direct the Assessing Officer to allow adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to produce all the evidences as well as explanation with regard to all the additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and which were deleted by the CIT(A). Thereafter, the Assessing Officer will pass the order afresh in accordance with law.
6. In the result, the Revenue's appeal is deemed to be allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 30th June, 2015 at Ahmedabad.
Sd/- Sd/-
(KUL BHARAT) (G.D. AGRAWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT
Ahmedabad; Dated 30/06/2015
Biju T., PS
ITA No. 1714/Ahd/2011
ITO vs. Shri Sanjay Anandray Bhatt
For AY 2008-09
4
षत Copy
आदे श क$ ूितिल,प अमे,षत/ of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. ू!यथ / The Respondent.
3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु. / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आयु.(अपील) / The CIT(A)
5. ,वभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
/ BY ORDER, आदे शानु सार TRUE COPY Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( उप/ अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad