sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Mangammal @ Thulasi vs. T.B. Raju (Supreme Court)
 Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)
 Cromption Greaves Limited vs. CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
 Director Of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Modiluft Ltd.
 Director Of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Royal Airways Ltd.

The Income Tax Officer,Ward 4(4),Chandigarh. Vs. Sh.Jaswant Singh Mann,Prop.M/s G.K.Flowers,# 266, Sector 35-A, Chandigarh.
July, 26th 2012
                      CHANDIGARH BENCH `A', CHANDIGARH


                                        ITA No.1168/Chd/2010
                                       (Assessment Year:2007-08)

The Income Tax Officer,                        Vs.                  Sh.Jaswant Singh Mann,
Ward 4(4),                                                          Prop.M/s G.K.Flowers,
Chandigarh.                                                         # 266, Sector 35-A,
(Appellant)                                                         (Respondent)

                            Appellant  by                 :         Shri Manjeet Singh, DR
                            Respondent by                 :          Shri Ajay Jagga
                            Date of hearing :                               18.07.2012
                            Date of Pronouncement :                         24.07.2012

                                                   O R D E R


         This      appeal        by      the     Revenue            is    against       the     order       of     the

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh dated 7.6.2010

r e l a t i n g t o a s s e s s m e n t ye a r 2 0 0 7 - 0 8 a g a i n s t t h e o r d e r p a s s e d u / s 1 4 3 ( 3 )

of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short `the Act').

2.       The preliminary issue raised in the present appeal by the

Revenue is vide ground No.1 which reads as under:

         "1.      On the facts and in the circumstances of the
                  case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in
                  allowing            appeal         of       the        assessee       without
                  appreciating the facts of the case."

3.       The learned D.R. for the Revenue pointed out that the assessee in

the appeal filed before the CIT (Appeals) had raised various grounds of

appeal but no issue in respect of addition of Rs.88,97,365/- was raised

before the CIT (Appeals).                       Our attention was drawn to para 4 of the

appellate order by which the CIT (Appeals) has addressed onl y the issue

of addition of Rs.88,97,365/-.

4.       The learned A.R. for the assessee was confronted with the above

said submissions of the learned D.R. for the Revenue and was awarded

time to address the Bench in respect of the preliminary issue raised by

the learned D.R. for the Revenue.                              In repl y the learned A.R. for the

assessee fairly submitted that though the addition was challenged by way

of ground No.1 wherein the assessee had claimed the addition made by

t h e A s s e s s i n g O f f i c e r t o b e a r b i t r a r y, b u t t h e s p e c i f i c g r o u n d o f a p p e a l

against the addition of Rs.88,97,365/- was not raised by the assessee.

5.       On perusal of the record and the orders of the Assessing Officer

and CIT (Appeals) we find that the addition made in the present case was

totaling Rs.88,97,365/-. The assessee had raised grounds of appeal Nos.

1 to 9 before the CIT (Appeals) which are incorporated under para 2 at

pages 2 to 4 of the appellate order and the same are not being reproduced

f o r t h e s a k e o f b r e v i t y. T h e p e r u s a l o f t h e s a i d g r o u n d s o f a p p e a l r a i s e d

b y the assessee before the CIT (Appeals) reflects the said grounds of

appeal being argumentative and were in the form of submission of the

assessee on various aspects of the assessment made in the hands of the

assessee.         The assessee had failed to raise specific ground of appeal

against the addition of Rs.88,97,365/-.

6.       The learned A.R. for the assessee had fairly admitted to the above

said omission. The CIT (Appeals) proceeded to dispose of the appeal by

observing vide para 4 as under:

         "4.      Since the grounds are not very specific, I would
                  address the issues taken up on the assessment
                  order which led to the addition of Rs.8897365."

7.       In the absence of specific ground of appeal raised by the assessee

and in view of the admission of the learned A.R. for the assessee we

deem it fit to restore the issue back to the file of the CIT (Appeals) to

adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee which are against the non-

compliance of procedure under section 142(3) of the Act and the reliance

on various affidavits etc.                     The assessee is at liberty to raise any

additional ground of appeal if so advised.                                 The CIT (Appeals) shall

decide the appeal de-novo in accordance with law after giving reasonable

opportunity of hearing to the assessee.                          The ground No.1 raised by the

Revenue is thus allowed for statistical purposes. We are not addressing

the issue on the merits of deletion made b y the CIT (Appeals).

8.      In the result, the appeal filed b y the Revenue is allowed for

statistical purposes.

        O r d e r p r o n o u n c e d i n t h e o p e n c o u r t o n t h i s 2 4 t h d a y o f J u l y, 2 0 1 2 .

        Sd/-                                                                  Sd/-
   (MEHAR SINGH)                                                        (SUSHMA CHOWLA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                                       JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated      24 t h Jul y, 2012

Copy to: The Appellant/The Respondent/The CIT(A)/The CIT/The DR.

                          Assistant Registrar,
                          ITAT, Chandigarh
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Internet Marketing Website Marketing Internet Promotion Internet Marketing India Website Marketing India Internet Promotion India Internet Marketing Consultancy Website Marketing Consulta

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions