Dholera Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer-6(1), Kanpur

ITA 10/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92147 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PINKI MAHAWAR
• Assessee Lawyers: V K CHOKSI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.10/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 DHOLERA PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. AHMEDABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 6(1) KANPUR TAN/PAN:AABCD2939H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. V. K. CHOKSI, C.A. RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PINKI MAHAWAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 21 04 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 06 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT'S APPEAL COMPLETELY IGNORING THE FACTUAL POSITION THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS VOID AB INITIO. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS OWN APPEAL. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT[A] HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO FILE THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF THE :- 2 -: GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED ALONGWITH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THE APPELLANT HAD VERY CATEGORICALLY SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING FACTS: I) THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS ELECTRONICALLY FILED U/S.!39(L) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON 30.9.2010 WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 1[4), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT. II) THE APPELLANT HAD CHALLENGED THE ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT KANPUR AS THE APPELLANT'S REGISTERED OFFICE WAS SITUATED AT THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS: DHOLERA PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD., 9TH FLOOR, SHIKHAR BUILDING, MITHAKALI SIX ROADS, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD-380 009. III) IT IS MANDATORY FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FIRST DISPOSE OF THE ASSESSEE'S OBJECTIONS REGARDING THE LAWFUL JURISDICTION AND THEN ONLY COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT, FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CASE GKN DRIVESHAFTS (INDIA) LTD. VS. ITO, 259 ITR19(SQ. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE STATEMENT OF FACTS WHEREIN THE APPELLANT HAD CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS MENTIONED ABOVE, WHICH FACTS WERE AVAILABLE IN THE :- 3 -: STATEMENT OF FACTS ATTACHED WITH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND WITHOUT GIVING ANY FINDING ON THE SAME CONCLUDED THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS OWN APPEAL. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED C.I.T. (APPEALS) U/S.144 REQUIRES TO BE VACATED AND THE ADDITIONS CONFIRMED BY HIM ON THE ASSUMPTION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANT. MOREOVER, THE LEARNED C.I.T. (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING ANY FINDING ON THE ARGUMENTS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE HIM. THUS, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED C.I.T. (APPEALS) SEEMS TO BE PASSED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND ON THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE HIM IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT AFFORDED OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT THOUGH OPPORTUNITIES WERE AFFORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE COMPLIANCE THEREOF AND SIMILAR WAS THE POSITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE RAISED BEFORE US :- 4 -: AFTER AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO EXTEND ALL SORTS OF CO-OPERATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT ON THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE US. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:5 TH JUNE, 2015 JJ:2104 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR