MD. IMRAN MD. ISRAEL SHEIKH, Nagpur V. ITO-WARD-2(2), Nagpur

ITA 135/NAG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1799 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K P DEWANI SHRI NARENDRA KANE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 135/NAG/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI MUKUL K. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. I.T.A. NO. 135/NAG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08. MD. IMRAN MD. ISRAEL SHEIKH, THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, 604/2, N.I. MANSION, BYRAMJI TOWN, V/S. WARD - 2(2), NAGPUR. JARIPATAKA, NAGPUR - 440 013. PAN BBJPS7132Q APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.P. DEWANI. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NARENDRA KANE. DATE OF HEARING : 04 - 08 - 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 TH AUGUST, 2015 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M. . THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) - I I, NAGPUR DATED 06 - 01 - 2014 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 . 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT GRANTING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEAR D AND THUS DISMISSAL OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS BAD IN LAW. 3. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT. AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF ` .1,64,265/ - THE INCOME ASSESSED WAS ` .50,04,975. UPON A SSESSEES APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) NOTED 2 ITA NO. 135/NAG/2014 THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICES ISSUED ON THREE OCCASIONS. HE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND HENCE THE SAME WAS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSE CUTION. CURS ORALY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROPERLY GIVEN THE EXPLANATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE EVEN ON MERITS THE APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 4. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER NOW THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL REQ UESTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED. 5. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE IN DETAIL ON MERITS BUT HAS SUMMAR ILY DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT EVEN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER CONSIDERING ALL THE MERITS OF THE ISSUES RAISED. ACCORDINGLY WE REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER SUO MOTO TO CANVASS THE APPEAL AS PER LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 14 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015. SD/ - SD/ - (MUKUL K. SHRAWAT) ( SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. NAGPUR, DATED: 14 TH AUGUST, 2015. 3 ITA NO. 135/NAG/2014 COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT, NAGPUR. 5. THE D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. G UARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER WAKODE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, NAGPUR