PREM LATA PANSARI, Jaipur V. ITO, NEEMKATHANA

ITA 1136/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1951 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM RAI DCIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

ITA NO.1136/JP/20 16 SMT. PREM LATA PA NSARI VS ITO,WARD- NEEM KA THANA 1 VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 1136/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SMT. PREM LATA PANSARI PROP. M/S. CHINAR SARI CENTRE KAPIL MANDI, NEEM KA THANA CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- NEEMA KA THANA, DISTT.SIKAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ADDPP 3650 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SATISH GUPTA, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SMT. POONAM RAI, DCIT - DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 16/10/2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 /10/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-35, NEW DELHI (CAMP OFFICE AT JAIPUR ) DATED 07-10-2017 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW ALSO LD. CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN PASSING APPEAL ORDER WI THOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. IN FACT, NO NOTICE DATED 17 -12-2015 AND 22-09- 2016 WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW ALSO LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES GROSSLY ERRED IN MAKING AND C ONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,65,092/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAID. ITA NO.1136/JP/20 16 SMT. PREM LATA PA NSARI VS ITO,WARD- NEEM KA THANA 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD. L OWER AUTHORITIES GROSSLY ERRED IN MAKING AND CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF WAGES. 2.1 AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN PASSING APPEAL ORDER WITHOUT GI VING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THE LD.AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO NOTICE S DATED 17-12-2015 AND 22-09- 2016 WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE APPE AL MAY KINDLY BE RESTORED TO THE AO FOR AFRESH DECISION BY PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 2.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 2.3 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER IN THE ABSENCE OF THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF LD. CIT(A )S FINDING IS AS UNDER:- 4.1 THE AO WAS ASKED TO CONFIRM THE STATUTORY VAL IDITY OF THE APPEAL FILED U/S 249/249(4)OF THE I.T. ACT. HE WAS ALSO GI VEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING VIDE THE SAID NOTICE. HOWEVER, NO REPLY HAS BEEN RE CEIVED BY THE AO. THEREFORE, IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE AO CONFIRMS THE STATUTORY VALI DITY OF THE APPEAL FILED AND DOES NOT WISH TO REMAIN PRESENT IN THE APPELLATE PR OCEEDINGS. 4.2 DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THERE WERE NO N-COMPLIANCE BY THE APPELLANT A/R. THE DETAILS OF NON-COMPLIANCE IS AS FOLLOWS:- ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 250(1) HEARING OF FIXED FOR RESPONSE OF THE APPELLANT 15-09-2015 28-09-2015 REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT 17-12-2015 08-01-2016 NONE APPEARED 22-09-2016 30-09-2016 NONE APPEARED HENCE, THERE WERE NO ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS OR FACT S BROUGHT UP BY THE APPELLANT TO DEFEND ITS APPEAL. THE APPEAL IS THEREFORE, BEIN G DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AND RECORD AVAILABLE IN FILE. ITA NO.1136/JP/20 16 SMT. PREM LATA PA NSARI VS ITO,WARD- NEEM KA THANA 3 THUS IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS DEPRIVED OF C ONTESTING THE CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) DUE TO NON-RECEIPT OF THE NOTICES AND THE AO HAD ALSO NOT SUBMITTED ANY REPLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS TO THE VALIDITY OF T HE APPEAL FILED U/S 249/249(4)OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUST ICE TO RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE IT AFRESH BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23/10/201 7. SD/- HKKXPUN ( BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 23/10/ 2017 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SMT. PREM LATA PANSARI, NEEM KA THAN A 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- NEEM KA THANA 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1136/JP/2016 ) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR