Mr Sama Shekar Reddy, Hanamkonda V. ACIT., Circle-2(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 108/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 10822514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: T CHAITANYA KUMAR
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO108 OF 2015 SAMA SHEKHAR REDDY HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT.ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.108/HYD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11) SHRI SAMA SHEKAR REDDY HYDERABAD PAN- APOPS 1248 F VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(2) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI T. CHAITANYA KUMAR FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAMAKRISHNA BANDI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.05.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 .05.2015 O R D E R PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-III HYDERABAD, DATED 12 TH NOVEMBER, 2014 RELATING TO A.Y 2010-11. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR OF M/S E-MUG TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, FILED HIS R ETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2010-11 ON 28.10.2010 ADMITTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.12,71,404. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/ S 143(3) ON 6.3.2013 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,10 ,71,400. 3. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). THE CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE, 1 ST NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED ON 25.8.2014 FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON ITA NO108 OF 2015 SAMA SHEKHAR REDDY HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 4 15.09.2014 ON WHICH THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. SECOND NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED ON 22.09.2014 F IXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 10.10.2014. AGAIN, NO RESPONSE CAME FROM THE ASSESSEE. ONE MORE NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 20.10.2 014 FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 3.11.2014. ON THAT DATE, AS SESSEE FILED AN ADJOURNMENT LETTER STATING THAT THE A.R. IS OUT OF STATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 12.11.2014. AGAIN ON 12.11.2014, ASSESSEES AR FILED A LETTER WHEREIN ON E MORE ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. SEEKING ADJOURNMENTS ON ONE REASON OR OTHER CLEARLY SHOWED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT KE EN TO PURSUE HIS OWN APPEAL. THUS, THE LD CIT (A) ADJUDICATED TH E APPEAL AS UNDER: 5. BY NOT APPEARING IN APPEAL DESPITE THE MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES BEING PROVIDED, THE PRINCIPLES OF NAT URAL JUSTICE HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED AT ALL BY THE ASSESS EE AND REFLECT SCANT RESPECT FOR THE TAX LAWS OF THE COUNTRY. 4. THE LD CIT (A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE. 5. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI CHAITANYA STATED THAT AN EX-PARTE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE LD CIT (A) AND DUE TO LACK OF LEGAL GUIDANCE AVAILABLE TO HIS ASSESSEE, THOUGH SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES WERE GRANTED ON VARIOUS DATES TO THE ASSESSEE, NONE APPEARED ON THE DATES OF HEARING, NOR ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS W ERE FILED. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVE N TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE LD DR STATED THAT IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSE E DOES NOT SHOW INTEREST TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL HA S INHERENT ITA NO108 OF 2015 SAMA SHEKHAR REDDY HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 4 POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL AND RELIED ON THE DECIS ION IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.62 OF 2009 AND REQUESTED THE BENCH TO CON FIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT (A). 7. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. IT IS A MATTER OF REG RET THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHOSEN TO AVAIL THE MULTIPLE OPPOR TUNITIES GIVEN TO HIM AND NOT BOTHERED TO APPEAR ON SEVERAL OCCASI ONS BEFORE THE CIT (A), THOUGH NOTICES WERE SENT AND ADJOURNME NTS WERE GRANTED. THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED THE TAX LAW OF TH E COUNTRY NOT IN A SERIOUSNESS MANNER, BUT IN A TOTAL CASUAL MANN ER. CONSIDERING THE TOTAL NON COOPERATION BY THE ASSESS EE, WASTAGE OF TIME BY VARIOUS AUTHORITIES CONCERNED WITH THE C ASE AND OTHER INCIDENTAL EXPENDITURE INBUILT IN THE SYSTEM OF REC OVERY OF TAX, WE DEEM IT FIT TO IMPOSE COST OF RS.5000/- WHICH IS TO BE PAID TO THE PRIME MINISTERS RELIEF FUND, WHICH SHALL BE PAID B Y THE ASSESSEE WITHIN THE END OF THIS MONTH. WE SET ASIDE THE APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR FRESH ADJUD ICATION. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MAY, 2015. S D/ - S D/ - (P.M. JAGTAP) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED15TH MAY, 2015. ITA NO108 OF 2015 SAMA SHEKHAR REDDY HYDERABAD. PAGE 4 OF 4 VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. MR. SAMA SEKHAR REDDY, H.NO.6-3 1219/1/6/1 FLAT NO. 403 UMANGAR, BEGUMPET, BEHIND LIFE STYLE HYDERABAD 5000 16 2. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(2) HYHDE RABAD 3. CIT(A) III HYDERABAD 4. CIT II HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER