Himanshu Gupta, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer-3(2), Kanpur

ITA 12/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0559 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH GIDWANI
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJIV TANDON
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.12/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 HIMANSHU GUPTA 7 TH FLOOR, BASANT TOWER 7/41-A TILAK NAGAR, KANPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(2) KANPUR TAN/PAN:AAVPG6772E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. SANJIV TANDON, C.A. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. HARISH GIDWANI, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 24 04 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 06 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF NON COMPLIANCE OF NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SECTION 250 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND IN PERSON OR THROUGH A AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AS WAS GROSSLY INVOLVED IN A DIVORCE CASE WITH HIS ERSTWHILE SPOUSE. 2. THAT LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED RS 5,60,000.00 ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CASH CREDITS WHICH IS A WRONG FACT AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND AGAINST LAW, HENCE BEING CHALLENGED AND SHOULD BE DELETED. :- 2 -: 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS NOT RECEIVED FROM THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT AFFORDING VALID OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3. THE LD. D.R. HAS SIMPLY PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ISSUED FEW NOTICES, BUT THERE IS NO FINDING IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO THE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC FINDING WITH REGARD TO THE SERVICE OF NOTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT AFFORDED VALID OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO EXTEND ALL SORTS OF CO-OPERATION TO THE LD. CIT(A) IN DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:12 TH JUNE, 2015 :- 3 -: JJ:0505 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR