Smt. Kuldeep Rajput, Patiala V. ITO, Patiala

ITA 124/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90097 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Assessee Lawyers: KULDEEP RAJPUT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 124/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) SMT.KULDEEP RAJPUT, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER #71A, OPP.KESAR BAGH, WARD 1, PARTAP COLONY, PATIALA. PATIALA PAN: AJBPR7005C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT.KULDEEP RAJPUT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.04.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), PATIALA DATED 28.11.2014 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 29.9 .2014, 16.10.2014 AND FINALLY ON 4.11.2014 AND AGAIN THE A PPEAL WAS FIXED FOR 25.11.2014. BUT NOBODY APPEARED BEFO RE HIM ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT (APPEALS) FURT HER NOTED 2 THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE ON MERITS IN ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT EXPLAINED THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION A T THE LEVEL OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE C HALLENGED THE EX-PARTE IMPUGNED ORDER. ACCORDING TO SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IS REQUIRED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE GIVING REASONS FOR D ECISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT (AP PEALS) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE MERITS OF THE CASE EVEN IF T HE ASSESSEE REMAINED EX-PARTE BEFORE HIM. NO REASONS FOR DECISION HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN THE APPELLATE ORDER WHI LE DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) WITHOUT GIVING REASONS HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED C IT (APPEALS) THUS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW AND THE M ATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LEARNE D CIT (APPEALS). WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), PATIALA WITH DIRECTION TO RE DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS GIVING REASONS FOR DECISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE AGAIN R EMAINED EX-PARTE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO COOPERATE W ITH THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) FOR FINAL DISPOSAL OF THE APP EAL. THE 3 LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) SHALL GIVE REASONABLE SUFFICI ENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT SEEK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTE R. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 9 TH APRIL, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH