PRADEEP SINGH GREWAL,MAYURBHANJ vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

1 ITA No. 518/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 07- 200 8

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 518/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-2008

Pradeep Singh Grewal, At: Vs. ACIT, Balasore Range, Padmapur, Jashipur, Dist: Balasore. Mayurbhanj PAN/GIR No.AJSPG 0282 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bal, AR Revenue by : Shri A. Tigga, DR

Date of Hearing : 26/04/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 26 /04/ 2018

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the

CIT(A)-, Cuttack dated 20.1.2015 for the assessment year 2007-2008.

“1. For that the order of the forum below is arbitrary, illegal and unjust in the facts and circumstances of the case and liable to be quashed.

2 ITA No. 518/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 07- 200 8 4. For that Ld. Assessing officer erred in completing the assessment u/s 263/144 of the Income tax Act without serving a notice calling upon the Assessee to show cause, why the assessment should not be completed to the best of judgment. Therefore the assessment have been completed violating the principles of natural justice and liable to be quashed.

J.B. Roadways. During the course of assessment proceedings, the

Assessing Officer based on the financial statement found that the

assessee has claimed transportation charges of Rs.83,64,196/- debited in

the profit and loss account. When the information was called for, the

assessee could not substantiate the claim by providing details of

transactions, address of the persons to whom the payments were made.

According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee was required to deduct

TDS at the prescribed rate under the provisions of section 194C applicable

in respect of transportation charges and also as per Tax Audit Report, the

assessee has not deducted TDS from such persons who had supplied

their vehicles on hire to the assessee. The Assessing Officer further relied

on the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) and formed an opinion that the

provisions of section 194C are attracted and passed order under section

143(3) on 4.9.2009 without considering the facts of non-deduction of

TDS.

3 ITA No. 518/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 07- 200 8 4. Subsequently, the CIT on perusal of the assessment records found

that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of

the revenue in respect of non-deduction of TDS and issued a show cause

notice u/s.263 of the Act to the assessee. Finally, the CIT set aside the

assessment order for fresh adjudication.

completed the assessment u/s.263/144 of the Act as the assessee failed

to appear before him despite giving various opportunities of hearing. The

Assessing Officer completed the assessment determining the total income

at Rs.91,77,700/-, inter alia, disallowing transportation charges in

contravention of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act of Rs.83,64,196/-.

there was no compliance from the side of the assessee.

all the documents in his possession to produce before the Assessing

Officer as well as the CIT(A) and in the interest of substantial justice, one

more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to present its case.

on record, we find that the assessee could not appear before the

Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A). On perusal of the order of the

CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) has observed that the assessee did not

4 ITA No. 518/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 07- 200 8 appear before the Assessing Officer as well as before him or file the

written submission in spite of several opportunities allowed to the

assessee. We find that the CIT(A) has mentioned three dates of hearing

viz; 18.11.2014, 17.12.2014 and 20.1.2015 but there is no mention in

the order about issuance of notice to the assessee for the dates of hearing

fixed and their service on the assessee. In absence of the same, in our

considered view, the CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of

the assessee for non-appearance of the assessee on the dates of hearing.

Therefore, in order to render substantial justice, we set aside the order of

the CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication

of the appeal of the assessee after allowing reasonable opportunity of

hearing. The assessee is directed to appear before the CIT(A) and render

full co-operation by filing all the details as and when called upon to do so.

purposes.

Order pronounced on 26 /04/2018.

Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 26 /04/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS

5 ITA No. 518/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 07- 200 8

Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Pradeep Singh Grewal, At: Padmapur, Jashipur, Dist: Mayurbhanj 2. The Respondent. ACIT, Balasore Range, Balasore 3. The CIT(A)- Cuttack 4. Pr.CIT- Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack