Baljinder, Panchkula V. DCIT, Panchkula

ITA 1154/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57604 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANJOT
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1154/CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) BALJINDER VS. THE D.C.I.T., PANCHKULA. CIRCLE PANCHKULA. PANCHKULA. PAN: AJQPB6889H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANJOT RESPONDENT BY : SMT.JAISHREE SHARMA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.01.2012 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M, : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), PANCHKULA DAT ED 27.09.2011 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN A PPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WHICH IS REFUSED IN VIEW OF THE MATTER NOT BEING ADJUDICATED BY THE CIT (APPEALS). 3. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEA LS) WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT (AP PEALS) FOR NON- PROSECUTION BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS A GAINST THE PASSING OF AN EX-PARTE ORDER BY THE LD. CIT(A) DUE TO THE N ON ATTENDANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORDER O F CIT(A). THE 2 PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRES REASONABLE OP PORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE PASSING AN ORDER. WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER IN THE CASE. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE CIT(A) HA S TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN RESPECT OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT CIT(A) IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS FAILED TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AS LA ID DOWN IN SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DEC IDE THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE SPEAKING ORDER AFTER ALLOWING RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECT ED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE APPOINTED DATE/S OF HEARING AND PRESE NT HIS CASE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. WE ARE NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUE ON MERI TS IN VIEW OF OUR SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 20 TH JANUARY, 2012 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH