Gujarat Cypromet Ltd., Mumbai V. The ACIT, Circle -4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1460/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 76662 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P VAISHNAV
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD 0 00 0 0 00 0 , , , , !' !' !' !' # # # #0 00 0 0 00 0 $# $# $# $#, , , , % % % % & & & & BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1460/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03) GUJARAT CYPROMET LIMITED 81/82, MAHALAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VIII, IYAVA, SANAND-VIRAMGAM HIGHWAY, SANAND DIST., AHMEDABAD. PAN: AAAGG5591R V/S ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AHMEDABAD. (APPELLANT)/ '( (RESPONDENT)/ ) '( APPELLANT BY/ '( * + : MS. URVASHI SHODHAN, AR RESPONDENT BY/ ) '( * + : SHRI O.P. VAISHNAV, DR -#!. * /% / DATE OF HEARING : 21-04-2014 012 * /% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-04-2014 ( 3 3 3 3 )/ ORDER PER SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-VIII, AHMEDABAD DATED 13.05.2011 BY T AKING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLA NT AND THEREBY CONFIRMING THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDE R U/S. 144 PASSED BY THE AO AND ALSO THE ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCE MADE THEREIN BY THE AO. ITA NO. 1460/AHD/2013 GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD. VS. ACIT, CIR-4,AHD AY 2002-03 - 2 - 2.1 THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLA NT WITH THE OBSERVATION THAT THE CIT (A) GAVE SIX OPPORTUNITIES TO THE APPELLANT TO PURSUE ITS APPEAL BUT NONE OF THE OPPORTUNITY WAS AVAILED BY THE APPELLAN T AND THEREFORE, THE CIT (A) ERRONEOUSLY JUMPED TO TH E CONCLUSION THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE ITS APPEAL NOR DOES IT LEAVE ANY COGENT EVIDENCE FOR ACCEPTABLE EXPLANATION AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF THE AO. 2.2 THE APPELLANT SAYS THAT THE SO-CALLED SIX NOTIC ES OF HEARING REFERRED TO AT PARAGRAPH 3.0 PAGE 2 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER UNDER APPEAL HAD NOT BEEN RECEIVED OR SERVED UPON THE APPELLANT AS THE FACTORY PREMISES O F THE APPELLANT REMAINED CLOSED AT THE MATERIAL TIME WHEN THE NOTICES ARE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED AN D SENT TO THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE, THE OBSERVATIO N MADE BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) WITH RESPECT TO THE NON - ATTENDANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING IS UNJUSTIFIED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITH THE OBSERVATION THAT 'FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS GATHERED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS RAREL Y ATTENDED THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND MOST OF THE TIMES, EITHER HEARING WAS NOT ATTENDED OR THE REQUI RED DETAILS WERE NOT FURNISHED DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THIS OBSERVATION OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD. THE APPELLANT HAS CAUSED APPEARANCE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (A) ON 05.10.2006 AND ON 12.10.2006 AND FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 11.10.2006 AND THE CASE WAS ALSO DISCUSSED WITH THE LEARNED CIT(A). A COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 05.10.2006 & 11.10.2006 FILED BEFORE THE PREDECESSOR CIT (A) ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLA NT WITHOUT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT REFERRED TO HEREINABOVE. 5. THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLA NT WITH THE OBSERVATION THAT 'THERE IS NO MATERIAL ITA NO. 1460/AHD/2013 GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD. VS. ACIT, CIR-4,AHD AY 2002-03 - 3 - AVAILABLE ON RECORDS WHICH SUGGESTS ANY RELIEF TO T HE APPELLANT'. THE APPELLANT SAYS THAT THIS OBSERVATIO N OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD. 6. THE LEARNED CIT (A) GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLA NT WITHOUT STATING IN THE APPELLANT ORDER THE POINTS F OR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISIONS AND THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT ORDE R PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS IN CONTRAVENTION O F THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 7. IT IS THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) MAY PLEASE BE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL GROUND-WISE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN SIX OPPORTUNIT IES OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND ON NEITHER OF THE DATES OF HEARING FIXED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT FOR HEARING. THE D ETAILS OF THESE DATES OF HEARING ARE AS UNDER: SR.NO. DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF HEARING 1 1.10.2010 15.10.2010 2 21.12.2010 4.1.2011 3 7.1.2011 25.1.2011 4 7.2.2011 22.2.2011 5 24.2.2011 10.3.2011 6 22.3.2011 31.3.2011 4. THE FIRST HEARING WAS FIXED BY THE LD. CIT(A) O N 18.07.2006, AND THEREAFTER THE HEARINGS WERE FIXED ON 15.10.2010, 4.1.2011, 25.1.2011, 22.2.2011, 10.3.2011 AND 31.3. 2011. ITA NO. 1460/AHD/2013 GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD. VS. ACIT, CIR-4,AHD AY 2002-03 - 4 - 5. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD FILED DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A) BUT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED WHILE DISPOSING OFF TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS CHA NGE IN THE INCUMBENT IN THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAD N OT CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE HIS PREDECESSOR IN OFF ICE WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFOR E, IT WAS PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNI TY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 6. THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR GRANTING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRESENTING ITS APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT IT IS A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ORDER CAME TO BE PASSED U /S 144 OF THE ACT ON 13.05.2011 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREA FTER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MEND ITS WAYS AND AGAIN DID NOT CO MPLY WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFO RE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSI NG THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PUT IN AN APPEARANCE ON THE SIX DATES OF HEARIN G FIXED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED T HAT DUE TO THE ASSESSEE BECOMING A SICK COMPANY AND REFERRED TO TH E BIFR AND ALSO THERE BEING CHANGE OF ADDRESS, NOTICE OF HEARI NG COULD NOT BE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS ITA NO. 1460/AHD/2013 GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD. VS. ACIT, CIR-4,AHD AY 2002-03 - 5 - SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATT ER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR HEA RING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AND RE-ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A STATEMENT AT THE BAR THAT SHE UNDERTAKES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND RENDER FULL COOPERATION BY FILING ALL THE MATERIAL BEFORE HIM F OR CONCLUDING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL EXPEDITIOUSLY. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, THE MA TTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR ADJ UDICATING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE F ILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RE-ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE AFRESH. BEFORE PARTING WITH THE ORDER, WE WOULD LIKE TO STA TE THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL SUO MOTU APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER FOR FIXING THE HE ARING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER DIR ECTED TO FILE ALL MATERIALS AND DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS AN D WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL ALSO ENDEAVOUR TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL EXPEDITIOUSLY. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 25 TH OF APRIL, 2014 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( D.K. TYAGI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( N.S. SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 25/04/2014 GHANSHYAM MAURYA, SR. P.S.