M/s Prem Prakash Tubes Pvt. Ltd., Indore V. The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal

CO 60/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1005 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, J.M. AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, A.M. I.T.A.NO.188/IND/2013 A.Y. : 2009-10 ACIT, PREM PRAKASH TUBES PVT.LTD., 1(1), VS. 308 - C, PREM TRADE CENTRE, BHOPAL MAHARANI ROAD, INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. AAECP7204N C.O.NO.60/IND/2013 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO.188/IND/2013) A.Y. : 2009-10 PREM PRAKASH TUBES PVT.LTD., ACIT, 1(1). 308 - C, PREM TRADE CENTRE, VS. BHOPAL MAHARANI ROAD, INDORE. CROSS OBJECTOR RESPONDENT -: 2: - 2 DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R. A. VERMA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 09.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.07.2015 O R D E R PER GARASIA, J.M. THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), RAIPUR DATED 30.01.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY. THE RETU RN OF INCOME WAS FILED U/S 153A. THE ASSESSMENT WAS CO MPLETED U/S 153A READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 1.50 CRORES ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. 3. THE MATTER CARRIED TO LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) DE LETED THE ADDITION. -: 3: - 3 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT WHILE DECI DING THE APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT REM AIN PRESENT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX-PAR TE. THEREFORE, BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL, THE AO MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HAVING HEARD THE LD. SENIOR D.R., WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT (A) IN HIS ORDER HAS WRITTEN THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF T HE DEPARTMENT AND AS PER THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE S UPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. AMRITLAL BHOGILAL & CO ., 34 ITR 130, WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT THE APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y EXERCISES THE POWER IF FOUND TO HEAR ITO OR HIS REPRESENTATIV E. OUR VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMEN TS: I) IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 AND 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. -: 4: - 4 II) IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN T AKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 6. IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HE ARING, NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS O F INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLA TE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 7. WE FIND THAT IN THIS CASE THE AO WAS NOT HEARD. THEREFORE, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE O F LD. CIT(A) -: 5: - 5 AND CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO GIVE NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE MATTER AFRESH. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES AND CROSS OBJECTION IS DISMISSED, AS IT HA S BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 TH JULY, 2015. SD/- (B. C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 09 TH JULY, 2015. CPU* 09.7