9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee's appeals shall be dismissed for non-appearance of the appellant and adjudicated the same on merit after going through he period but since the request form both he quarters is common that the two appeals be heard on merit, which is apparent from the petition of the Revenue and the assessee's letter dt. 23rd July, 1982 both extracted and placed above, we accept the Revenue's petition and recall the order dt. 24th June, 1982 with a direction that the appeal be fixed in due course of time for fresh hearing." 2. AS a consequence of this order, the appeals were re-fixed an came up for hearing and the ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. D. K. Gupta, submitted that the order of the CIT (A) for the both the assessment years setting aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the return, here again was filed before the ITO, Malerkotla, on 28th Nov., 1977 and the same was ordered to be transferred to ITO, Ludhiana, who right from that date pursued the matter in respect of assessment. He vehemently argued that lack of opportunity had been highlighted before the first appellate authority by the assessee and the same is also so narrated in the grounds of appeals. TO that effect, the ld. Departmental Representative wanted to place on record a statement from Mr. C. L. Jain, Junior Authorised representative, before us, who co-incidentally happened to be the ITO framing the two impugned assessments, but the same was ordered not to be taken on record as it could neither be termed legally a statement nor i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. 1977-78 though the return was filed on 28th Nov., 1977 and it was transferred to ITO, Ludhiana, but not much progress took place till 23rd Feb., 1980. Beside these facts, two additions in sums of Rs. 32,000 and Rs. 50,015 were made on ad-hoc basis and the ITO for asst. yr. 1976-77 observed while making the said addition of Rs. 32,000 that: ".....I make a lump sum addition of Rs. 32,000 which will push up the G. P. rate to reasonable extent." Similarly, for asst. yr. 1977-78, the ITO made the following observations: ".....I make an addition of Rs. 50,015 on a/c of suppression of stocks. This, will however, cover the addition which is otherwise warranted for low gross profit." When the assessee disputed this action of the ITO befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned ITO in making an addition of Rs. 50,015 on a/c of suppression of stock is unwarranted, uncalled for and arbitrary. The addition merits deletion. 5. That in any case the addition of RS. 50,015 is arbitrary, highly excessive and merits reduction." The ITO, an the other hand, also submitted before the CIT (A) that the said additions were made without a deeper scrutiny in both the assessment years under consideration, as would be apparent from the following observation available in the order of the CIT (A): ".....In fact, during the course of hearing of these appeals proceedings even the ITO, who appeared on behalf of the Department, agreed that the additions have rather been made without making a deeper scrutiny into the facts of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
