Sankhla Suman, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Hyderabad

ITA 1128/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3132 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVINDRA CHENJI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1128/HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 16 - 17 SANKHLA SUMAN, HYDERABAD. PAN: CONPS 4670 D VS. ITO, WARD - 7(3), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI RAVINDRA CHENJI REVENUE BY: SRI SUNKU SRINIVAS, DR DATE OF HEARING: 06/11/201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06 /11/201 9 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 10157/ITO - 7(3)/HYD/CIT(A) - 3/2018 - 19, DATED 21/5/2019 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2016 - 17. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN HER APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3, IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 3. THE APPELLANT CONTENDS THAT SHE WAS PREVENTE3D FROM FILING ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCE BY THE ALLEGED EX - PARTE APPELLATE ORDER IN THE FIRST POSTING OF THE HEARING ITSELF, 2 DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE LETTER OF ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED AND ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) - 3. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION O F RS. 16,50,200 U/S. 58 OF THE ACT BY HIS UNILATERAL ORDER AND BY DEPRIVING RIGHT OF THE APPELLANT TO SUBSTANTIATE HER APPEAL BY WAY OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DIRECTED THE A.O. TO ADOPT 8% OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS AS SHE WAS INTO THE BUSINESS OF HOME MADE PAPADS ON RETAIN BASIS. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS AS THE OCCASION MAY REQUIRE. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR BRIEFLY NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PURS UE THE APPEAL . LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEAR ED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS IN ORDER AND APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I FIND MERIT IN 3 THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASION S . HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATES OF HEARING. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. IN THIS SITUATION, I DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUME NTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR, AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, I ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BA SED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06 TH NOVEMBER , 2019. SD/ - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 06 TH NOVEMBER , 2019 OKK 4 COPY TO: - 1) SANKHLA SUMAN, 15 - 8 - 460/B, FEEL KHANA, HYDERABAD. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(3), SIGNATURE TOWERS, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 3, HYDERABAD. 4) THE PR. CIT - 3, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE