Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar
M/S H.R Builders & Suppliers, Srinagar vs Income Tax Officer, Circle-3(3), ... on 17 March, 2020
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
BEFORE SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SH. ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.466/Asr/2017
Assessment Year: 2012-13
M/s H.R. Builders & Suppliers Income Tax Officer,
Prop. Zahoor Ahmad Khan, Circle-3(3), Srinagar
168 Budshah Colony, Vs. Jammu & Kashmir.
Sanat Nagar, Srinagar.
[PAN:ASDPK 03664L]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : None
Respondent by: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. Sr. DR)
Date of hearing: 16.03.2020
Date of pronouncement: 17.03.2020
ORDER
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM:
The instant appeal has been preferred by the Assessees against the order dated 31/03/2017 passed by the learned. CIT(Appeals), J&K, Jammu u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act'). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal.
"01) Th at on the f ac ts and in the c ircu ms tan ces of the c as e the Ld. CIT (Appe al s) h as no t been jus tif ied in res toring the r ate of prof it appl ied by the A.O resul ting in additi on of Rs.2,66,847/- on the gross receip ts of Rs.33,35,590/-.It is submitte d th at the c al cul ation f or appl ying the r at e and spl ittin g the business receip ts under self s tyl ed c al cul ations made by the A.O not qu ashed by the Id CIT Appeal s, is un jus tif ied unwar r an ted b y l aw.l t is reques ted th at the tr ading result sho wn may k indl y be excep ted.
2 ITA N0.466/Asr/ 2017 M/s H.R. Builders & Suppliers vs. ITO
02) Th at on the f ac ts an d in the c ircu ms tan ces of the c as e the Ld. CIT (Appe al s) h as no t been jus tif ied in res toring the r ate o f 5% on the tr ading tu rnover of Rs 1,99,11,977/- as seper ated /spl itted b y the (A.O). It is requested th at the r ate of prof it so appl ied by the A.O on spl itted tr ading Account an d restored without application of by the Ld CIT Appe al s , is unjus tif ied and unwar r an ted and b ad in l aw, may k indl y be qu ashed.
03) Th at on the f ac ts and in the c ir cu ms tances of the case the Ld CIT (Appe al s) has no t been Justif ied in restor ing an d re tai ned the self styl ed c al cul ati on made b y the A.O wh il e disposing the c ase an d by seper atin g in teres t inco me f rom the Tr ading & prof it Loss A/c, added b ack seper atel y at R s.30,12,840/- is unjus tif ied, un war r an ted and b ad in l aw , may k in dl y be qu ashed.
04) Th at on the f ac ts in the cir cu ms tances of the c ase the Ld CIT (Appeal s) h as no t been Justif ied in res tor ing the addition of Rs.1,43,142/- made by the A.O af ter he misguided himself , It is requested th at the addition so restored is un jus tif ied unwarr an ted, may k indl y be del eted."
3. Vide impugned order dated 25.03.2015 the income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.44,18,420/- against the return of income of Rs.15,24,784/-.
4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Vide impugned appellate order dated 31.03.2017 the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)' for short] dismissed the assessee's appeal in limine, holding that the appellant was not interested in pursuing its appeal. In coming to this conclusion the learned CIT(A) noted that the assessee did not attend appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A) u/s 250(6) of the I.T. Act despite being given several opportunities of being heard.
4.1 On perusal of the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 31.03.2017 of the learned CIT(A), it is found that the learned CIT(A) has not decided the issues in dispute on merits and has instead dismissed the assessee's appeal in a summary manner, in limine without deciding the disputed issues on merits. Thus, it is found that the learned CIT(A) failed to comply with statutory provisions contained u/s 250(6) of 3 ITA N0.466/Asr/ 2017 M/s H.R. Builders & Suppliers vs. ITO Income Tax Act requiring the learned CIT(A), while disposing of the appeal, to state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. It is obvious from perusal of section 250(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961 that the learned CIT(A) is required to pass a speaking order in writing and to decide the points of dispute on merits, giving reasons for his decision. The learned CIT(A) having failed to comply with the provisions of section 250(6) of Income Tax Act, we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 31.03.2017 of the learned CIT(A) with the direction to the learned CIT(A) to pass a fresh order in due compliance with Section 250(6) of Income Tax Act. All the issues in dispute are accordingly restored to the file of learned CIT(A) for passing fresh order in accordance with law, having regard to section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assesses is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 17/03/2020.
Sd/- Sd/-
(N.K.CHOUDHRY) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 17/03/2020.
/PK/ Ps.
Copy forwarded to:
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT
4. Then CIT(Appeals)
5. SR DR, I.T.A.T. Amritsar
6. Guard File
True Copy
By Order