Mohd. Saber Ali, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-4(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1035/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66354 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISHA S GUPT
• Assessee Lawyers: M PRABHUDAS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1035/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 SRI MOHD. SABER ALI HYDERABAD PAN: AKNPM1277A VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(1) HYDERABAD APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SRI M. PRABHUDAS RESPONDENT BY: SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT DATE OF HEARING: 15 . 1 0.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15.10.2012 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V, HYDERABAD DATED 7.5.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. THE CIT(A)-V WAS NOT PRESENT IN HIS OFFICE AT THE D ATE AND TIME I.E., 26.4.2012 AT 11.30 AM ON WHICH HE CALLED ME FOR HEARING. 2. MY AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE M. PRABHUDAS WAS PRESE NT FOR HEARING ON THE DATE AND THE TIME CALLED UPON BY THE CIT(A)-V BUT DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NO T PRESENT THE HEARING WAS POSTPONED 1.5.2012 AT 11.30 AM WHICH WAS NOT ATTENDED BY MY AR AS HE WAS NOT IN HYDERABAD. 3. THE CIT(A)-V HAD PASSED ON THE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING ANOTHER DATE FOR HEARING IN SPITE OF KNOWING THAT M Y AR WAS PRESENT ON THE DATE AND TIME FIRST CALLED UPON FOR HEARING BUT THE COMMISSIONER WAS NOT PRESENT IN HBI S OFFICE TO GIVE US OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING. 4. I HAVE RECEIVED ONLY ONE NOTICE FOR HEARING WHICH W AS FIXED ON 26.4.2012 AND OTHER NOTICES FOR HEARING I.E., ON 12.1.2012 AND 1.5.2012 WHICH IS MENTIONED IN THE OR DER OF THE CIT(A)-V WAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED BY ME. 2 ITA NO. 1035/HYD/2012 SRI MOHD. SABER ALI ================== 3. THE CRUX OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS W ITH REGARD TO NON-PROVIDING OF EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING B Y THE CIT(A). AS SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) EFFECTIVE OPPORTU NITY OF HEARING IS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT( A) IS ALSO NOT A SPEAKING ONE. THE CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER IN A VER Y MECHANICAL MANNER WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD CORRECT FACTS OF THE CASE. BEING SO, IT IS A VERY CRYPTIC ORDER WHICH CANNOT BE CONFIRME D. HENCE WE REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIR ECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH OCTOBER, 2012. SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 15 TH OCTOBER, 2012 TPRAO COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SR I MOHD. SABER ALI, 1 - 4 - 734/10, BHOLAKPUR, MUSHEERABAD, HYDERABAD 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WAR - 4(1), HYDERABAD. 3 . THE CIT(A) - V, HYDERABAD. 4 . THE CIT - IV, HYDERABAD. 5 . THE DR B BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD