Shri Pratyush Jayantkumar Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-10(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 1422/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 142220514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K SINGH SR DR

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , .. , '# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.1422/AHD/2012 ( & ' & ' & ' & ' / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI PRATYUSH JAYANTKUMAR SHAH 7-RIVERA 11 B/H. CHAMANBHAI PATEL INSTITUTE NR.PRAHLADNAGAR AUDA GARDEN VEJALPUR AHMEDABAD & & & & / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-10(4) AHMEDABAD ( '# ./)* ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ACIPS 5522 P ( (+ / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ,-(+/ RESPONDENT ) (+ . '/ APPELLANT BY : NONE ,-(+ / . ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D.K.SINGH, SR.D.R. &0 / #/ // / DATE OF HEARING : 29.8.12 12' / # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.8.12 '3/ O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-XVI AHMEDABAD DATED 24/11/2011 . THE ASSESSEES SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IS AGAINST THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) AND THE GRIEVANCE AS PER THE GROUND WAS THAT UNDER AN E RRONEOUS ASSUMPTION, IT WAS HELD BY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO GRIEVANCE FROM THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO. 1422/AHD/2012 SH.PRATYUSH JAYANTKUMAR SHAH VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2008-09 - 2 - 2. IT IS WORTH TO MENTION AT THE OUTSET THAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NO ONE HAD APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT. ON TH E OTHER HAND, FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE, LD.SR.DR MR.D.K.SINGH APPEARED AND PLEADED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANTS CASUAL APPROACH, THE EX-PARTE DECISION OF LD.CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE UPHELD. 3. HAVING CONSIDERED THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEAR NED CIT(APPEALS) COULD NOT BE SAID TO BE IN ACCORDANCE OF THE PROCEDURE LAID D OWN IN SECTION 250(6) OF IT ACT, WHEREIN IT IS PRESCRIBED THAT THE ORDER OF LEA RNED CIT(APPEALS) DISPENSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SH ALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. THESE INGREDIENTS, I.E. THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISIONS ARE LACKING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). AL THOUGH IT IS ALSO AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO APP EAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AND EVEN FAILED TO APPLY FOR ADJOURNMENT, THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. BUT IT WAS EXPECTED FROM LD.CIT (A) TO DECIDE ALL THE ISSUES IN THE LINE OF SUB-SECTION(6) OF SECTION 250 OF THE I.T.ACT. WE ARE ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT NO LITIGANT WOULD GAIN ANYTHING BY NON- APPEARANCE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES ALTHOUGH A LITIGA NT IS EXPECTED TO BE VIGILANT AND TO CO-OPERATE WITH THE AUTHORITIES TO GET THE L EGAL ISSUES RESOLVED AT AN EARLY DATE BUT THE HAPPENING OF UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES COULD ALSO NOT BE RULED OUT IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT PRONOUNCED IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQ UISITION VS. MST.KATIJI & ORS. REPORTED AS 62 CTR 23 (S.C.), WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO LD.CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO DECIDE DE NOVO ON MERITS, NEEDLESS TO SAY AFTER PROVIDING AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE THAT INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE OF THE ASSESSEE- ITA NO. 1422/AHD/2012 SH.PRATYUSH JAYANTKUMAR SHAH VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2008-09 - 3 - INDIVIDUAL SHOULD WITHIN 20 DAYS ON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CONTACT THE OFFICE OF LD.CIT(A) AND SUO MOTU ASK FOR A CONVENIENT DATE OF HEARING, SO THAT IT CAN BE DECIDED AT AN EARLY DATE WITHOUT WASTING FURTHER TIME FOR THE SERVICE OF NOTICE AND OTHER LIKE NATURE PRO CEDURES. HOWEVER, LD.CIT(A) IS AT LIBERTY TO TAKE DUE LEGAL STEPS AS REQUIRED U NDER LAW FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINALIZATION OF THIS APPEAL. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS , THIS APPEAL MAY BE TREATED AS ALLOWED ONLY FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED BUT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( ) '# ( T.R. MEENA ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 31 / 8 /2012 ..&, .&../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4'/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-(+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD 5. 49: ,& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :; <0 / GUARD FILE. '3& '3& '3& '3& / BY ORDER, -4 , //TRUE COPY// = == =/ // / ) ) ) ) ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION30.8.12 (DICTATION-PAD PAGES 4 ATTACH3ED) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 30.8.12 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S31.8.12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 31.8.12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER