Shri Jasminder Singh, Lucknow V. A.CIT, Lucknow

ITA 102/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 10223714 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANADI VERMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Deemed to accrue or arise in india; Right to appeal

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, A - BENCH, LUCKNOW. BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.102(LKW.)/2011 A.Y.: 2007-08 SHRI JASMINDER SINGH, VS. THE ADDL.CIT-IV, 28, AAMIR NAGAR, LUCKNOW. LUCKNOW. PAN ADWPS3346Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANADI VERMA, SR.D.R. O R D E R PER H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-II, LUCKNOW DATED 15.11.2010 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS: (I) DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES RS.2,90,883 (II) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS RS.2,1 6,000 (III) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED INCOME RS.13, 29,912 (IV) DISALLOWANCEU/S 40A(IA) RS.22,65,257 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASS ESSEE AND ALSO PERUSING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED 2 2 THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE. AFTER PERUSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT WOULD BE CLEAR THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS NOT PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DECIDING THE APP EAL. IN OUR OPINION, THE LD.CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE AFFORDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL. IN THE CASE O F RADHIKA CHARAN BANERJEE VS. SAMBALPUR MUNICIPALITY, AIR (1979) ORISSA 69, T HE HON'BLE ORISSA HIGH COURT HELD THAT A RIGHT OF APPEAL WHEREVER CONFERR ED INCLUDES A RIGHT OF BEING AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, IRRE SPECTIVE OF THE LANGUAGE CONFERRING SUCH RIGHT. THAT IS A PART AND PARCEL OF THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. WHERE AN AUTHORITY IS REQUIRED TO ACT IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL CAPACITY, IT IS IMPERATIVE TO GIVE THE APPELLANT AN ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL. THUS, CONSIDERING THE E NTIRE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE THINK IT PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN TOTO AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING DUE A ND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, NO FINDINGS ARE BEING GIVEN ON MERITS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.4.20 11. SD. SD. (N.K.SAINI) (H.L.KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT APRIL 20TH ,2011. COPY TO THE : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) (4) CIT 5.DR. A.R.,ITAT, LUCKNOW. SRIVASTAVA.