Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar,[in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’],order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’]
2 Assessment Year: 2009-10 for A.Y. 2009-10. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3) Srinagar, [in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 2. The appeal was filed with delay of minimum 02 days. With the consent of ld. DR, the delay for 02 days is condoned.
The assessee has taken the following grounds:
“01 ) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT (Appeals) has not been Justified in sustaining and retaining the addition, made by the Ld A.Oward -3(3), Srinagar at Rs 10,12,167/- .It is requested that the addition so sustainedby the Ld. CIT (Appeals) is unwarranted & bad in law, may kindly be deleted.”
Brief fact of the case is that during assessment the additions were made related to introduction of capital amount of Rs.10,12,167/- and the disallowance of expenses related to the business of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the ld. AO and reduced the disallowance of expenses related to business. Accordingly, the grounds of the 3 Assessment Year: 2009-10 appeal was partly allowed. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before us only to challenge the addition related to capital introduction amount Rs.10,12,167/-
The ld. AR of the assessee had filed a brief synopsis which is kept in the record. The assessee prayed that the appeal was completed without giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The ld. AR placed the CBDT Circular F.No.225/303/2014/IT A.IIdated November, 2014 where the CBDT had directed for conducting scrutiny assessment proceedings in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, in the aftermath of floods. The appeal was completed and passed the order on dated 29.10.2018 and also the assessment was duly completed on dated 15.12.2011. In between the assessee suffered by devasted flood in Kashmir Valley and the books of accounts of impugned assessment year was destroyed.
The ld. DR vehemently argued and fully relied on the order of the revenue authorities.
We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a trader of readymade garments and shawl. The assessee relied on the Circular of CBDT. The assessee placed that due to heavy flood the books of accounts were destroyed and the assessee was unable to produce relevant records before the ld. CIT(A). We find there is a reasonable casue for assessee to 4 Assessment Year: 2009-10 unable to submit the documents against his addition. We remit back the matter to the ld. CIT(A) for further adjudication and also to consider the issue in compassionate ground as directed in the CBDT circular, mentioned above. Needless to say, the assessee should get a reasonable opportunity of hearing in the set aside proceeding.
Accordingly, the is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing is allowed for statistical purposes.