Ravi Mallick, Ludhiana V. DCIT, Ludhiana

ITA 1121/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5123 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1121/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SH. RAVAI MALLICK, VS. THE CIT(A)-1, C/O SUNKRAFT DESIGNS, LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO. ADLPM4822E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL RESPONDENT BY : SH. MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 20.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.05.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2016 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS)-1 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)], LUDHIANA. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE WHILE INVI TING OUR ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS 2 AN EX PARTE ORDER. THE LD. AR. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER RELIED OUPON THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN DEPOS ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ENGAGED SHRI BRIJ MOHAN SHARMA, ADVOCATE TO REPRESE NT HIS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE SAID SHRI BRIJ MOHAN SHARMA DI D NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING. IT HAS B EEN FURTHER DEPOSED IN THE SAID AFFIDAVIT THAT EVEN ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E. 24.8.2016, WHICH INCIDENTALLY IS ALSO THE DATE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, AS NO NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE RE GARDING THE SAID DATE OF HEARING. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE CO ULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON STIPULATED DATE OF HEARING WHICH RESU LTED IN AN EX PARTE ORDER AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE A UTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS, THEREFORE, SUBM ITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNI TY TO CONTEST HIS CASE ON MERITS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 3. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE S HOULD HAVE BEEN VIGILANT IN PURSUING HIS MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE, W E ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL BE WELL SERVED, IF, TH E ASSESSEE IS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTEST HIS CASE ON MERITS BEFORE CI T(A). WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED EX PARTE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRES H ON MERITS AFTER GIVING ASSESSEE A PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO 3 ATTEND HIS CASE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AS AND WHEN CALLE D FOR AND FULLY COOPERATE IN THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE CIT(A). WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.05.2017 SD/- SD/- ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 19 TH MAY, 2017 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR