Manoj Kumar Gupta, Meerut V. ITO, Meerut

ITA 1324/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4287 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MONGA
• Assessee Lawyers: NIBHEL MEHTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1324/D/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 82, JAGANNATH PURI, WARD 1(4), T.P. NAGAR, MEERUT MEERUT PAN NO.ABKPG-6289N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI NIBHEL MEHTA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. MONGA, SR. DR ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL: AM: THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN 5 GROUNDS IN THE APPEAL. GROUND N O.2 IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINE WH EREAS EVEN IF HE WISHES TO PROCEED EXPARTE, HE SHOULD HAVE PASSED AN ORDER CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 2. THE SHORT PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE LEARNED DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO GRANTING THE PRAYER. 3. FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE CASE WAS F IXED FOR HEARING ON ELEVEN OCCASIONS. ON NINE OCCASIONS, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT A DJOURNMENT OR THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. THE NOTICES FOR TWO HEARINGS ON 04. 03.2009 AND 2 26.03.2009 WERE NOT SERVED BECAUSE THESE WERE RETURNED BY THE PO STAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARKS LEFT WITHOUT ADDRESS. THUS, ALTHOUG H THERE HAD BEEN FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LEARN ED CIT(A), HE DID NOT RECEIVE THE NOTICE IN RESPECT OF LAST TWO HEARINGS MENTIONED ABOVE. IN THE LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, WE THINK IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PROCEED WITH THE APPEAL ON MER ITS AFTER GRANTING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE PARTIES . LOOKING TO PERSISTENT DEFAULTS OF THE ASSESSEE, HE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT BEF ORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON 12.07.2011 WITH WHATEVER EVIDENCES AND SUBMISSIONS HE WANTS TO MAKE. THEREAFTER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHALL PROCEED AS PER LAW TO D ECIDE THE APPEAL. 4. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 18-04- 2011. SD/- SD/- ( I.P. BANSAL ) ( K.G. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 18-04-11 NS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, 82, JAGANNATH PURI, T.P. NAGAR, MEERUT. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), MEERUT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. 3 BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI).