Kamalesh Maity, V. ITO, WD-27(2), HALDIA, Haldia

ITA 1251/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4072 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVASH ROY JCITSRDR
• Assessee Lawyers: K M ROY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1251 / KOL / 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 KAMALESH MAITY UTTAR DARUA, CONTAI, PURBA MEDINIPUR BASUDEVPUR, KHANJANCHAK, HALDIA, PIN 721 602 [ PAN NO. ADSPM 2351 F ] V/S . ITO WARD-27(2), HOLDIA /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT SHRI K.M. ROY, FCA /BY RESPONDENT SHRI PRAVASH ROY, JCIT-SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 07-12-2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21-12-2016 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER O F COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-7, KOLKATA DATED 05.01.2016. A SSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ITO WARD-2, HALDIA U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 26.0 3.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT LD. CIT(A) H AS PASSED EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE. NOW, BEFORE US LD. AR STATED THAT ASSESSEE ITA NO.1251/KOL/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 KAMALESH MAITY VS. ITO WD-27(2), HALDIA PAGE 2 FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A) DUE TO SOME UNAV OIDABLE PROBLEMS. SO HE PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH TO RESTORE THE MATTER BEFOR E LD. CIT(A) AND ASSURED TO APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A). ON THE CONTRARY, LD. D R RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 3. CONSIDERING THE PLEA OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE PRO PER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE CIT(A). THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE RESTORE THIS FILE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DI RECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE MATTER AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING THE REASONABLE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT ASSESS EE SHOULD CO-OPERATE AT THE APPELLATE STAGE. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 21/ 12/2016 SD/- SD/- ( !') ( !') (A.T.VARKEY) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S $!% &- 21 / 12 /201 6 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-KAMALESH MAITY, UTTAR DARUA, CONTAI, PUR BA MEDINIPUR, BAUDEVPUR, KHANJANCHAK, HA LDIA, PIN-721 602 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WARD-27(2) HALDIA 3. %.%/0 1 1 2 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 1 1 2- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 567 /0, 1 /0 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 7:; <= / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ 1! , /TRUE COPY/ / % 1 /0 ,