M/s D.M. Kapur & Sons, Ludhiana V. ITO, Ludhiana

ITA 1218/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5421 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1218 /CHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) D.M.KAPUR & SONS, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 412, INDUSTRIAL AREA-A WARD VI(1) LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AAAFD7771R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHOK GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SARITA KUMARI, DR O R D E R THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), DATED 6.8.2010 RELATING TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL : 1. THAT THE WORTHY CIT(A)-II, LUDHIANA HAS ERRED I N DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT AGAINS T ORDER U/S 143(3) PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THAT NO REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WA S GIVEN TO REPRESENT THE CASE. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE A ND SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO ATTEND THE HEARING OF THE CASE. 4. THAT NOTWITHSTANDING ABOVE SAID GROUNDS OF APPEA L, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE WORTHY CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN 2 CONFIRMING THE ADDITION BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND HAVING NOT DISPOSED THE APPEAL BY CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND FACTS OF THE CASE ON MERITS. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE HAD FILED AN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHICH WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADJOURNED DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) HAS FAI LED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT ADJUDICATING CONFIRMED THE SAME. 4. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING. 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE C IT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OR HIS COUNSEL ON TH E RELEVANT DATE OF HEARING. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON MERITS OF THE ADDITION AND SUMMARILY CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT THE CIT(A) IS TO PASS THE ORDER IN WRITING STATING THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE SAID DECISION. THE SAID PROPOSITIONS OF LAW ARE BOUND TO BE FOLLOW ED BY THE CIT(A) EVEN WHEN THE ORDER IS MADE EX-PARTE THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW THEREOF I SET ASIDE THE PRESENT ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND RE STORE THE SAME TO HIS FILE TO DECIDE DENOVO THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE. A REASONABLE 3 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASS ESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DAY OF MAY, 2011. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30 TH MAY, 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH