Mrs. Jaspreet Kaur, Chandigarh V. DCIT, Chandigarh

ITA 1157/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73464 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1157/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 MRS. JASPREET KAUR, VS. THE DCIT H.NO. 405, SEC- 35A CIRCLE 4(1) CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH, PAN NO. ALTPK6983A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING : 13/02/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/02/2014 ORDER PER T.R.SOOD, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2013 OF CIT (APPEALS) CHANDIGARH. 2. IN THIS APPEAL ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWIN G GROUND: THAT ORDER OF THE LD. CIT APPEALS DATED 24/10/201 3, CHANDIGARH WHEREIN HE DISMISSED ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THE GROUN D THAT NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED ON 22/10/2013. NO WRITTEN SUBMISSION WAS FILED. THE DISMISSAL ORDER OF THE LD . CIT (APPEAL) IS HIGHLY EXCESSIVE ARBITRARY AND WRONG. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT APPE AL HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY OBSERVING THAT NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN FIL ED WHICH IS TOTALLY INCORRECT. HE REFERRED TO THE PAPER BOOK AND POINTED OUT THAT THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 22/10/2013 AND THE SAME WERE SENT EVE N THROUGH E-MAIL ON 21/10/2013 (COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED AT PAGE NO. 2 TO 4 O F PAPER BOOK). SINCE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIO N, MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE STRONGL Y SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT CASE WAS ADJOURNED ON 20/10/2013, AND ON THAT DATE NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED AND NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN FILED. T HIS MEANS LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH WERE SENT THROUGH E-MAIL AS WELL AS SAME WERE FILED IN HIS OFFICE. THEREFORE CLEARLY THE ASSESSEE S CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN IGNORED. THEREFORE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEN DECIDE THE ISSUE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD ALSO COOPERATE WITH THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/02/2014) SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMER DATED : 21/02/2014 AG COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR