Smt. Hiraben Gordhandas Kanteliya, Vapi V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vapi

ITA 1287/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94548 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDISH
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

, B IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1287/AHD/2015 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2007-2008 SMT.HIRABEN GORDHANDAS KANELIYA B-11, JAGAR PARK CHALA, VAPI. PAN : AJAPK 6017 A VS ITO, WARD-1, VAPI. / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARDIK VORA, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI JAGDISH, CIT-DR ! / DATE OF HEARING : 20/10/2015 '#$ ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20/10/2015 %& / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A), VALSAD DATED 18.3.2014 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT .YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN SIX GROUNDS OF APPEAL, BU T HER GRIEVANCE REVOLVES AROUND THREE ISSUES, VIZ. (I) THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, (II) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AT RS.12,58,227/- AND (III) THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADD ITION OF RS.2,52,000/-. ITA NO.1287/AHD/2015 2 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3 ,14,520/-. SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) WAS MADE O N 21.12.2009 DETERMINING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.3,98,6 16/-. THE LD.AO HAS REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U NDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT ON 30.3.2012. HE PASSED RE-ASSESSMENT O RDER ON 11.1.2013 AND DETERMINED TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS .19,08,840/-. 4. DISSATISFIED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSE SSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL. THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 18.3.2014. 5. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT NO DOUBT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS HANDED OVER THE PAPERS TO HER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, VIZ. SHRI RAJES H NADKARNI, WHO FAILED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND ULTIMATELY AFTER SIX OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARING HAVIN G BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, THE LD.CIT(A), HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL F OR WANT OF PROSECUTION. HE PRAYED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER BE SET ASIDE THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.DR CONTENDED THAT THE LD.F IRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS THE ASSESSEE WHO FAILED TO AVAIL THOSE OPPORT UNITIES. IF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WAS NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE C IT(A), THEN THE ASSESSEE OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THESE SIX NOTICES AND OUGHT TO HAVE INQUIRED ABOUT HIS NON-APPEARANCE. HE PRAYED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DESERVED TO BE DISMISSED. ITA NO.1287/AHD/2015 3 7. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT TO SOME EXTENT NEGLIGENCE IS ATTRIBUT ABLE TO THE ASSESSEE, BECAUSE, IN SPITE OF SIX NOTICES SERVED UPON HER, S HE FAILED TO ENQUIRE WHY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WAS NOT APPEARING. BUT LO OKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE PUNISHMENT IN THE SHAPE O F TAX LIABILITY, IS DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE ULTIMATE NEGLIGENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AND DEFEND HER CASE. WE, THERE FORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES T O FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO APPE AR BEFORE THE CIT(A) WITHIN TWO MONTHS FROM RECEIPT OF COPY OF THIS ORDE R AND FILE APPLICATION FOR TAKING UP THE PROCEEDINGS. THE LD.FIRST APPELL ATE AUTHORITY SHALL PROVIDE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE AS SESSEE. 8. THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY US WILL NOT IMPAIR OR I NJURE THE CASE OF THE AO. IT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY PREJUDICE TO THE EXP LANATIONS/DEFENSE OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED OF STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 20 TH OCTOBER, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 20/10/2015