Sh. Preetinder Singh, Chandigarh V. ITO, W-6, Patiala

ITA 1226/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6496 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARAMJEET KAUR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1226/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2010-11 SHRI PREETINDER SINGH, VS. THE ITO, C/O SUBHASH GUPTA & CO., WARD-6, SCO-5, OPP. AMAR ASHRAM, PATIALA. PATIALA PAN NO. AFNPS2300H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MS. PARAMJEET KAUR RESPONDENT BY : SMT.CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 14.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.12. 2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2017 OF LD. CIT (APPE ALS) PATIALA PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON MERITS AS WELL AS ON FOLLOWING GROUND NO. 1, WHICH READS AS UNDER : THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ISSUING THE EX-PARTE ORDER IGNORING THE FACT THAT NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSE E AS NO NOTICE OF HEARING HAD BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MO VED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE APPEAL COULD BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD QUA THE GROUND RAISED , IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO REJECT THE APPLICATION AND PROCEED WITH T HE PRESENT APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA ASSESSEE APPELLANT ON MERITS AFTER HEARING LD. SR.DR. 3. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 6,16,180 /- OF THE ASSESSEE EMPLOYEE OF M/S PARABOLIC DRUGS LTD. WAS ASSESS ED AT RS. 23,16,180/-. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITIONS BEFORE T HE CIT(A). VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER WERE GR ANTED BY THE CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEED INGS AND REMAINED REPEATEDLY UNREPRESENTED. THE RECORD SHOWS TH AT NOTICES WERE SENT AS PER PARA 4.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT THE ADDRESS MENT IONED IN ITA-1226/CHD/2017 A.Y 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 FORM NO. 35 WHICH IS AS UNDER : MR. PREETINDER SINGH, C/O SUBHASH GUPTA & CO. SCO-5, OPP. AMAR ASHRAM, PATIALA. 3.1 HOWEVER, IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE ITAT, THE ASSESSEE AS PER COLUMN NO. 10 HAS GIVEN THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS : SHRI PREETINDER SINGH, HOUSE NO. 1393, SECTOR 33-C, CHANDIGARH 3.2 ACCORDINGLY, ADMITTEDLY THE NOTICES WHICH MAY HAVE BE EN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE APPARENTLY WERE NOT RECEIVED AS THE ASS ESSEE HAD SHIFTED THEREFROM. ACCORDINGLY, AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR.DR IN THE INTERESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, IT IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO DE CIDE THE ISSUES AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD. IT IS HOPED THAT THE OPPORTUNITY SO PROVIDED, IS NOT ABUSED B Y THE ASSESSEE AS IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ABUSE OF THE SAME, THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY PASS A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE O N RECORD. THUS, IT IS HOPED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTERESTS MAKES FULL AND PROPER COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.12. 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT/CHANDIGARH