M/s Bhushan Information Technologies Pvt.Ltd, Chandigarh V. DCIT-CC-1, Chandigarh

ITA 110/CHANDI/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4821 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-05-2021
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 143(1); 250

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH A, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., !' #$! %'$ , BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, V P ITA NO. 110/CHD/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 M/S BHUSHAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., PLOT NO. 3, INDUSTRIAL AREA A, CHANDIGARH. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH. PAN NO: AACCB 6589 Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR, C.A. #!' REVENUE BY : SMT. MEENAKSHI VOHRA, ADDL.CIT -DR $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 20/05/2021 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20/05/2021 &'/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/11/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-3, GURGAON. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. THAT ORDER PASSED U/S 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3 IS AGAIN ST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE INASMUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO A RBITRARILY DECIDE THE APPEAL EX PARTE. 2. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, FURTHER GRAVELY ERRED TO UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS DISALLOWING LOSS AMOUNTING TO RS. 89,57,020/- WRITTEN OFF ON INVESTMENT ON THE GROUND THAT THIS INVESTMENT HAD NEVER BEEN PASSED THROUGH THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. 2. FROM THE AFORESAID GROUNDS, IT IS GATHERED THAT ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY TH E LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 2 ITA 110/CHD/2020 M/S BHUSHAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES P LTD. VS DCIT 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASS ESSEE E-FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29/09/2015 DECLARING NIL INCOME WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED T O AS, THE ACT) ON 02/08/2016 AND REFUND ALONGWITH INTEREST WAS ISSUED TO THE ASS ESSEE. LATER ON, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE A.O. FRAMED THE ASSES SMENT AT AN INCOME OF RS. 9,52,805/- BY MAKING ADDITIONS OF RS. 89,57,020/- A GAINST THE RETURNED LOSS OF RS. 80,04,215/-. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A), WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY OBSERVING IN PARA 3.1. AND 3.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS UNDER: 3.1 NOTICE U/S 250 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED IN THE APPE LLATE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, FIXING THE CASE OF HEARING ON 24/05/2019, 15/07/2019 AND 06/11/2019 RESPECTIVELY. HOWEVER NOBOD Y APPEARED IN RESPONSE TO THESE NOTICE(S) ISSUED. NO SUBMISSIONS WE RE FILED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE ENTIRE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 3.2 THE AFORESAID CIRCUMSTANCES SHOW THAT THE APPELLANT I S NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE ITS APPEAL. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPLY FROM THE APPELLANT, THE MATTER IS BEING DECIDED EX PARTE. THE MAXIM VIGILA NTIBUS NON- DERMINETIBUSJURASUBVENUNT I.E. THE LAW ASSIST THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS IS APPLICABLE IN T HIS CASE. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD BY PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX PARTE AND EVEN IT WAS NOT MENTIONED AS TO WHETHER THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE A SSESSEE. 6. IN HER RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. SR.DR, ALTHOUG H SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BUT COULD NOT CONTRO VERT THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 3 ITA 110/CHD/2020 M/S BHUSHAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES P LTD. VS DCIT 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CA SE, IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX PARTE. HE SIMPLY STATED THAT THE NOTICES OF HEARING WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND LAST ONE WAS FOR HEARING ON 06/11/2019. HOWEVER, NO WHERE IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERM PARTEM. WE THEREFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES OF NAT URAL JUSTICE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RES TORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/05/2021) SD/- SD/- #$! %'$ , .., (MAHAVIR SINGH) (N.K. SAINI) / VICE PRESIDENT / VICE PRESIDENT *RANJAN DATE: 20/05/2021 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE