Mamta Goel, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ward-1(4), Ghaziabad

ITA 14/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1145 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: SMC-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] ITA NO.14/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SMT. MAMTA GOEL, CH. NO. 206-297, ANSAL SATYAM, RDC, RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD VS. ITO, WARD-1(4), GHAZIABAD PAN :AGNPG1969K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORD ER DATED 10/10/2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS), GHAZIABAD [IN SHORT THE LD. CIT(A)] FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. BECAUSE, ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. BECAUSE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTY WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AS ASSESSEE APPELLANT BY SHRI AKHILESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.K. GUPTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 01.07.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01.07.2021 2 ITA NO.14/DEL/2020 WAS PREVENTED WITH SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT APPEARIN G ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 3. BECAUSE, LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN DISPOSING A PPEAL HURRIEDLY AND SUMMARILY DISMISSED ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL E VEN WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF EACH GROUND WITH MATERIAL ON RECORD WHICH IS AGAINST SETTLED LAW. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IN VIEW OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED OF CASH DEPOSIT OF 12,38,000/- IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT AND INVESTMENT MADE IN PURCHASE OF IMM OVABLE PROPERTY AMOUNTING TO 53,42,000/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REOPENED THE A SSESSMENT BY WAY OF ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE FIL ED RETURN OF INCOME, HOWEVER, NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE OF SUBSEQUE NT STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED UNDER THE ACT AND THEREFOR E THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN TERMS OF SECTION 144 (B EST JUDGEMENT ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF AVAILABLE MATE RIAL) OF THE ACT READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AFTER MAKING A DDITION OF 65,80,000/-. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL B EFORE THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, DUE TO NON-COMPLIANCE BEFORE HER A LSO, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED. AGGRIEVE D, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNA L (IN SHORT THE TRIBUNAL) RAISING THE GROUNDS AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. 3. BEFORE US, THE PARTIES APPEARED THROUGH VIDEO CONFE RENCING FACILITY. THE ASSESSEE FILED A PAPER-BOOK CONTAININ G AFFIDAVIT OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEA L IN EX- 3 ITA NO.14/DEL/2020 PARTE , IN HURRIED MANNER, WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT O N 18/09/2019, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) DUE TO PERSONA L DIFFICULTY AND HE APPEARED BEFORE HER AFTER TWO DAYS AND REQUE STED TO PROVIDE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY. NO SUBSEQUENT NOTICES WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) INSTEAD OF PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE, DECIDED THE APPEAL EX- PARTE . THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE IS WILLING TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED CI T(A), AND THEREFORE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK FOR DECIDING AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING DOCUMENTARY EV IDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE O RDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE NON- COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE A SSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) I S JUSTIFIED IN ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL. 6. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSION OF THE PARTIES ON T HE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON REC ORD. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) FIXED THE HEARING FOR THE FIRST TI ME ON 11/06/2019 WHICH WAS ADJOURNED TO 18/06/2019, AND THEN FURTHER ADJOURNED TO 04/07/2019. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOTED THAT ON 04/07/2019 NONE ATTENDED. COMPLIANCE OF ANOTHER NOT ICE DATED 16/09/2019 WAS ALSO NOT MADE. BEFORE US, THE LEARNE D COUNSEL HAS EXPRESSED PERSONAL DIFFICULTY OF THE LEARNED AU THORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON 04.07.2019 AND SUBMITTED THA T 4 ITA NO.14/DEL/2020 SUBSEQUENT NOTICE DATED 16/09/2019 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN OUR OPINION, IN VIEW OF THE REASONABLE CAUSE FO R FAILURE TO ATTEND THE HEARING BY THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE , THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTAN TIAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE HEAR D BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDE R OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HER F OR DECIDING AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND VERIFYING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION TH AT BOTH THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL BE AFFO RDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE GROUNDS OF THE APPE AL ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) (O.P. KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 ST JULY, 2021. RK/- (DTDC) COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI