Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :-
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A)-11 dated 22/03/202 on the following grounds of appeal:- “Difference in Stock —Excess Stock amounting to Rs.2,06,88,995/Because the learned CIT (Appeals) is erred in treating the difference in stock as unexplained excess stock,
Page 2 of 4 amounting to Rs.2,06,88,995/and there is no difference in quantity of stock of the appellant as the value adopted by the Learned officer was on the market value but the stock was to be valued at the Cost or Market value whichever is less as the value adopted was market value hence there arised difference which is purely on account of Valuation of the Closing stock on Market Value when the same is adequately explained by the appellant company before the learned lower authorities and they failed to appreciate this aspect also at there is no difference at all no justice was given to the submissions made by the appellant, the addition needs to be deleted. Because the learned CIT (Appeals) has not followed the aspect of Principles' on natural justice and equity before passing the order has the Learned CIT (Appeals) ought to have considered the request for adjournment of hearing as the dates of hearing was given on 10-03-2022 and 18-03-2022 and the same was not considered and impugned order passed by the Learned CIT ( Appeals) in so far it is against the appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case.”
In the course of hearing, it was pointed out by the learned counsel of the assessee that the CIT(A) had decided the matters ex- parte and, therefore, she submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to CIT(A)'s file for deciding various grounds of appeal on merits.
The ld.DR agreed with the aforesaid statement of the learned AR.
Page 3 of 4 3.1 We have considered the facts of the case and the request made by the ld.AR. We are of the view that interest of justice will be served if the matter is restored to the file of first appellate authority for deciding various grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits. Accordingly, the CIT(A) is directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeal on merits. The assessee is directed to comply with the directions of the CIT(A) for early disposal of the appeal by avoiding unnecessary adjournments, etc.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 26th day of September, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (BEENA PILLAI) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated, 26th September, 2022 / vms / Copy to:
1. 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore.