M/s Hotel Jimmy International, Chandigarh V. Addl. CIT (TDS), Chandigarh

ITA 1375/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0791 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGENDER MITTAL SR DR
• Assessee Lawyers: SUSHIL OFFICE EMPLOYEE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay; TDS; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH !, ' # , $ % & ' ( , )* # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM ./ ITA NOS. 1375/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S HOTEL JIMMY INTERNATIONAL, SCO 3025-26, SECTOR 22-D, CHANDIGARH. VS THE ADDL. CIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN/TAN NO: PTLH12036D / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ./ ITA NOS. 1376/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S HOTEL PANASH, PLOT NO. 3, KALKA HIGHWAY, VILLAGE-BALTANA, NAC-ZIRAKPUR. VS THE ADDL. CIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN/TAN NO: PTLH12087F / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ./ ITA NOS. 1377/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S HOTEL CHANDIGARH RESIDENCY, SCO 423-24, MOTOR MARKET, MANI MAJRA (CHANDIGARH). VS THE JC IT (TDS), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN/TAN NO: PTLH12340G / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUSHIL (OFFICE EMPLOYEE) # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI YOGENDER MITTAL, SR.DR $ % ! &/ DATE OF HEARING : 27.03.2019 '()* ! &/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.03.2019 )+/ ORDER PER BENCH THESE THREE APPEALS OF DIFFERENT ASSESSEES PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEARS AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-I CHANDIGARH DATED ITA-1375 TO 1377/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 3 29.08.2018, 25.08.2018 AND 28.08.2018 RESPECTIVELY ARE BEIN G TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ARE EX-PARTE ORDERS AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO P ARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO REJECT THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION AND PROCEED WITH THE HEARING EX- PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR.DR. 3. IN EACH OF THESE APPEALS, THE ASSESSEE HAS APPEALED AGAINST THE NEAR IDENTICAL ORDERS OF THE ACIT (TDS) CHANDIGARH WHEREIN PEN ALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) HAS BEEN IMPOSED FOR THE SPECIFIC DAYS OF DELAY IN FILIN G OF THE TDS RETURN IN THE NEXT QUARTER. IT IS SEEN THAT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR AS WOULD BE APPARENT FROM PARA 5.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN ITA 1375/CHD/2018 AND PARA 5.1 IN ITA 1376/CHD/2018. THE LD. SR.DR WAS SPECIFICALLY HEARD ON THIS. 4. WE FIND ON GOING THROUGH THE RECORD FIND THAT EVEN BE FORE THE ACIT (TDS), THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR. ACCORDINGLY, TAKING N OTE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE APPELLATE ORDER, W E DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS IN THE INTE RESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PA SS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WHILE SO DIRECTING IT IS HOPED T HAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL UTILIZE THE OPPORTUNITY FAIRLY AND FULLY BY OFFERING AN EX PLANATION AND MAKING PROPER COMPLIANCES BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY AND N OT ABUSE THE TRUST REPOSED. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ABUSE OF THE TRUST REPOSED, THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS THE ORD ERS ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESS EES WHEREIN WE HAVE NOTED THAT ADMITTEDLY NO EXPLANATION WHAT SO EVER HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEALS IN ITA NOS.1375 AND 1376/CHD /2018 ARE SET ASIDE WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS. 6. IN ITA 1377/CHD/2018, IT IS SEEN THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AS BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. THE APPEAL ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE ACIT (TDS) PASSED U/S 272A(2)(K) WAS FILED LATE BY 73 DAYS. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY BEFORE THE S AID AUTHORITY. WE FIND THAT BY WAY OF FILING OF THE PRESENT APPEA L THE ASSESSEE ITA-1375 TO 1377/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 PAGE 3 OF 3 HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE DISMISSAL AND ITS GRIEVANCE REMAINS . ACCORDINGLY, IN THE INTERESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE THE ORDER IS SET ASID E WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE ASSESSEE TO FIRST EXPLAIN THE DELAY OF 73 DAYS IN FILIN G OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THEREAFTER ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON ME RITS, IF NEED BE. HEREIN ALSO AS NOTED, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ACIT (TDS) AND ALSO BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND EVEN FAILED TO ADDRESS THE DELAY, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORD ER IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH IDEN TICAL DIRECTIONS BOTH TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AS GIVEN IN ITA 1375 & 1376/CHD/2018. AT THE COST OF RE-ITERATION IT IS MADE C LEAR HEREIN ALSO THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ABUSE OF THE TRUST REPOSED IN THE ASSESSEE, LD. CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILA BLE ON RECORD. THUS, IT IS HOPED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OW N INTEREST MAKES FULL AND PROPER COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.03.2019. SD/- SD/- ( $ % & ' ( ) ( ! ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA S INGH) )* #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER % $ (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ / / CIT 4. $ / ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. -23 4, & 4, 67839/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 38 :%/ GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, ; #/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR