International School Human Resource & Welfare society, Patna V. ACIT- Circle-1, Patna

ITA 136/PAT/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9630 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA , JM ITA NO. 1 36 /PAT. /2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2011 - 12 INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF HUMAN RESOURCES & SOCIAL WELF ARE SOCIETY, 61, NEAR ALPANA MARKET, SOUTH N EW PATLIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, PATNA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 137/PAT./2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012 - 13 INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF HUMAN RESOURCES & SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIETY, 61, NEAR ALPANA MARKET, SOUTH N EW PATLIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD - 1, PATNA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAAAI2856B ASSESSEE B Y : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. ABHAY KUMAR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 09 .03 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 09 .0 3 .201 8 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM : THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S DATED 11.07.2017 AND 28.08.2017 OF LD. CIT( A ) - 1 , PATNA . 2. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THESE APPEALS RELATES TO THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE WITHOUT ADJUDICATING ON MERIT. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE T HAT THE AO LEVIED THE PENALTIES OF RS.10,000/ - EACH IN BOTH THESE YEARS FOR NON - COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 142(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ITA NO . 1 36 & 1 37 /PAT. /201 7 INTERNATIONAL SCHO OL OF HUMAN RESOURCES & SOCIAL WELFARE 2 ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO BY PASSING THE EX - PARTE ORDERS. 4 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. THE LD. SR. DR IN HIS SUBMISSIONS SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 5 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION S OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, FROM THE BODY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) MENTIONED THAT NOBODY WAS PRESENT EITHER ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR THE DEP ARTMENT. HE, THEREFORE, DISPOSED OFF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. WE, THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT( A ) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 09 /03 /2018 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( AMIT SHUKLA ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 09 /0 3 /2018 *SUBODH*