Shri Anandilal Solanki, Indore v. The Income Tax Officer wd-3(3), Indore

ITA 557/IND/2010 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 55722714 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AFEPL6997A
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 557/IND/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Shri Anandilal Solanki, Indore
Respondent The Income Tax Officer wd-3(3), Indore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 04-11-2011
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 30-08-2010
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.557/IND/2010 A.Y. 2008-09 ANANDILAL SOLANKI INDORE PAN AFEPL 6997 A ... APPELLANT VS ITO-WARD-3 INDORE ... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI H.P. VERMA & SHRI ASHISH GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN DATE OF HEARING : 3.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.11.2011 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 3.6.2010 OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX-I INDORE MAINLY ON THE GROUND THAT ON THE FACTS AND I N THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ERRED 2 IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.9 80 000/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS OF CASH U/S 69 OF THE I.T. ACT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL WE HAVE HEARD SHR I H.P. VERMA ALONG WITH SHRI ASHISH GOYAL LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI ARUN DEWAN LEARNED SR. DR. AT TH E OUTSET THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT TRUE FACTS HAVE NOT BEEN APPRECIATED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY COULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED THEREFORE THERE IS DENIAL OF NATUR AL JUSTICE OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY AN AGRICULTURIST AND THE SUM DEPOS ITED IN THE BANK WAS OUT OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF SALE OF AGRIC ULTURAL LAND AND THERE IS NO OTHER INCOME. HOWEVER THE LD. SR. DR DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON FILE. IF THE TOTALITY OF FACTS ASSERTED BY THE LD. RESPECTIVE COUNSEL AND THE CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE 3 IMPUGNED ORDER ARE ANALYSED WE ARE OF THE CONSIDER ED OPINION THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE FACTUM OF FILING OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS BEE N MENTIONED IN PARA 1.07 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ALSO. THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ALSO NO P REJUDICE BE CAUSED TO EITHER SIDE THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS SENT TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISS UE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASS ESSEE WITH FURTHER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE IF ANY TO SUB STANTIATE ITS CLAIM. FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN IN THE PRESENCE O F LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD SD (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 4.11.2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR GU ARD FILE