M/S RAJEEV KUMAR & PARTY,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-1, KOTA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 229/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 April 2019AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee did not appear before the AO because notices were not served, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without proper consideration. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was reopened, and an addition of Rs. 4,84,190/- was made on account of contract receipts. The assessee contended that notices were not served due to business closure and relocation, and additional evidence was not considered by the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Validity of reopening of assessment and addition of contract receipts, and proper consideration of evidence by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 142(1),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 229/JP/2019

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 09/04/2019Pronounced: 10/04/2019

ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), Kota dated 05/10/2018 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in the matter of order passed U/s 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for reopening of assessment as well as for addition of Rs. 4,84,190/- on account of contract receipts.

1.

2 ITA 229/JP/2019_ M/s Rajeev Kr. & party Vs. ITO 3. At the outset, the ld AR of the assessee has contended that the notice issued by the A.O. could not be served on the assessee in so far as the assessee has closed its business and shifted to some other place, therefore, could not attend the proceeding before the A.O. He has further submitted that before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed additional evidence which goes to the root of the issue for deciding the validity of the addition so made by the A.O., however, same were not considered by him.

4.

On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

5.

We have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. From the record we found that the assessee was awarded a VAT Collection Post in the district of Baran (Raj.) for mining of missionary stones and therefore the firm was formed and constituted to apply and carry on the collection on behalf of the Govt. of Raj.. The awarded contract was for a limited period and further not renewed therefore the office of the firm was closed by the assessee after completion of contract of collection of tax and so that the notices from the Department of Income-tax could not be served timely to the assessee and therefore the assessee

3 ITA 229/JP/2019_ M/s Rajeev Kr. & party Vs. ITO failed to comply the proceeding initiated. After filling of the appeal to the ld. CIT(A), Kota, the assessee approached to the Commercial Tax Department to get for copies of the of the relevant papers because of the related papers were not kept by the assessee in possession but they could not able to get the copies of the relevant papers in time. From the record we found that the assessee could not appear before the A.O. and produced the relevant documents in so far as the notice of reopening as well as notice issued U/s 142(1) of the Act was not served on the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the assessee’s appeal without issuing any notice. The ld. CIT(A) has also not disposed off the appeal in terms of provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act which requires that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) should be in writing, state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.

6.

In view of the above facts and circumstances and keeping into account the evidences and documents so produced are relevant for deciding the issue by the A.O., in the substantial interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of the A.O. for deciding the issue afresh after considering the evidences so filed by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the A.O. within the period of 4 ITA 229/JP/2019_ M/s Rajeev Kr. & party Vs. ITO two months from the date of receipt of this order otherwise the A.O. shall at liberty to pass order as per material placed on the record.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th April, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (VIJAY PAL RAO) (RAMESH C SHARMA) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 10th April, 2019 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- M/s Rajeev Kumar & Party, Kota. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward 1(1), Kota. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 229/JP/2019) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →