Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI C.M. GARG & SHRI O.P.MEENA
Shri Badri Prasad V ITO 2(2), Bhopal ITA No.459/Ind/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page 1 of 3
आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, इंदौर �यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE �ी सी.एम.गग�,�या�यक सद�यतथा�ी ओ.पी.मीना,लेखा सद�यके सम� BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No.459/Ind/2017 �नधा�रणवष� /Assessment Year: 2008-09
Shri Badri Prasad, Income Tax Officer, 2(2), Bairagh Chichi, Kolar v. Bhopal Road, Bhopal अपीलाथ� /Appellant ��यथ� /Respondent �था.ले.सं./PAN: CUYPP1138 E
Shri Anil Kamal Gaud & अपीलाथ�क�ओरसे/Appellant by Arpita Guad, CAs Shri Lalchand, CIT DR ��यथ�क�ओरसे/Respondent by
26.09.2017 सुनवाईक�तार�ख/Date of hearing 26.09.2017 उ�घोषणाक�तार�ख/Date of pronouncement ORDER PER O.P. MEENA, AM.
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Bhopal [in short referred to as the CIT (A)] dated 27.03.2017 pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09.
Shri Badri Prasad V ITO 2(2), Bhopal ITA No.459/Ind/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page 2 of 3
The assessee has taken as many as four grounds of appeal, however, Ground No.1 & 2 relates that the AO has erred in making assessment order u/s 144 of the Act without considering the material fact and affordable reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Similarly, CIT(A) has also erred in dismissing the appeal without giving proper and effective opportunity being heard to the appellant and without prejudice by confirming the addition of Rs.40,00,000/- made on account of allegation of receipts which are capital receipts within the provision of Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment was framed u/s 144 of the Act and without any all fariness he does not have any objection to the issue restored to the file of the AO for consideration. 4. The Ld. DR concurred with the submissions of the Ld. Counsel. 5. We have heard the rival contention of both the parties and we find that no proper opportunity being heard was allowed to the assessee by the AO as well as CIT(A). The principle of audialtermpartem rule is the basic principles of natural justice, expression, the audialtrermpartem implies that a person must be given opportunity of being heard. This principle is a requirement in the every civilized society, the right to notice, the right to present the case and right to rebut with evidence, right to cross examination, right to legal representation, restore evidence to party and reasonable decision of speaking orders is must as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Menaka Gandhi V Union of
Shri Badri Prasad V ITO 2(2), Bhopal ITA No.459/Ind/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page 3 of 3
India. Therefore, we are of the view that the assessee must be given one more opportunity to represent his case. Therefore, in exercise of power conferred in section 28 of the Tribunal rules we restore the entire appeal with entire issue to the file of the Ld.AO for denovo consideration making as fresh assessment after allowing the assessee proper opportunity of being heard in accordance with the law. Nevertheless to mention that the assessee will cooperate in the assessment proceedings and file necessary evidences on which he wants to be relied upon. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for
statistical purpose.
The order pronounced in the open Court on 26.09.2017
Sd/- Sd/-
( C.M. GARG) (O.P. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �दनांक /Dated : 26th September, 2017 Copy to: Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/Guard file. By order Assistant Registrar, Indore