Tarun Patel, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad

ITA 150/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7333 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMA KRISHNA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 22

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B - SMC , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.146/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 RITESH PATEL, HYDERABAD. PAN: AEJPP 5578 F VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 147 /HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 14 - 15 VINOD PATEL, HYDERABAD. PAN: ADXPV 5998 E VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 148 /HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 14 - 15 KISHORE PATEL, HYDERABAD. PAN: AOEPK 4306 H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 149 /HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 14 - 15 ROHIT PATEL, HYDERABAD. PAN: AEOPK 6301 C VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 150 /HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 14 - 15 TARUN PATEL, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2 HYDERABAD. PAN: AEBPT 9059 D WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI RAMA KRISHNA REVENUE BY: SRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, DR DATE OF HEARING: 22/01/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22/01/2020 ORDER ALL THE CAPTIONED APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 6, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NOS.10270, 10269, 10277, 10271 AND 10272/ 2017 - 18/B2/CIT(A) - 6, DATED 28/09/2018 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 AND U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 1 5 . SINCE THE ISSU ES IN ALL THESE APPE ALS ARE IDENTICAL AND WITH RESPECT TO RELATED PARTIES THEY ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF IN THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. THE IDENTICAL GROUNDS IN THESE APPEALS ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW : 1. THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. THE A.O. ERRED BY NOT UNDERSTANDING THE SALE TERM BETWEEN THE VENDOR AND VENDEE WHERE IN THE SALE OF PROPERTY WAS A STOCK IN TRADE THAN A SALE OF CAPITAL ASSET. 3. THE A SSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING THE PLEA AS THE ORDER WAS PASSED ON THE FIRST DATE OF HEARING EVEN AFTER PROVIDING AN ADJOURNMENT. 3 . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN ALL THE FIVE APPEALS THERE IS A DELAY OF 18 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN 3 THIS REGARD ALL THE ASSESSEES HAVE SUBMITTED AFFIDAVITS . FOR REFERENCE, THE RELEVANT PORTION FROM TH E AFFIDAVITS IS EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW: 1 2 . 3 . 4 .WE HAD RECEIVED A DATE OF HEARING ON 28/09/2018 AND AN ORDER WAS PASSED ON THE SAME DATE EVEN AFTER FILING FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE SAME DATE. 5. THE APPEAL W A S DISMISSED WITHOUT GIVING US A CHANCE TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF OUR CASE ON THE FIRST HEARING ITSELF AND WE WERE TRYING TO GET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR RECTIFICATION OF OUR ORDER AND PROVIDE US ANOTHER HEARING DATE. 6. THERE HAS BEEN A DELAY OF 28 DAYS IN FILING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APP ELLATE TRIBUNAL AND I HAD NO INTENTION TO JEOPARDIZE THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE BY DELAYING THE FILING OF THE APPEAL. 4 . ON PERUSING THE AFFIDAVITS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR 28 DAYS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, I DO NOT FIND MUCH MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY OF 28 DAYS AND PROCEED TO HEAR THE APPEAL S ON MERITS. 5 . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDERS IN ALL THE FIVE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUN ITY TO THE ASSESSEE S TO PURSUE THE IR APPEAL S . LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT Y HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE S HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATE OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE S NOR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE 4 APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER ON MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER S PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S MAY BE DISMISSED. 6 . I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I FIND THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE S FOR HEARING O N 28/09/2018. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE S BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVEMENTIONED DATE OF HEARING. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTH ER OPTION EXCEPT TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. IN THIS SITUATION, I DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR, THE ISSUES IN THE APPEALS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO TH E FILE OF LD. CIT (A) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL S AFRESH BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE S OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, I ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE S TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILIN G WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER S IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD AFTER PRO VIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE S OF BEING HEARD . IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5 7 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FIVE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND JANUARY, 2020. SD / - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 22 ND JANUARY, 2020. OKK COPY TO: - 1) RITESH PATEL, PLOT NO.887, FLAT NO.2C, ANAND NIVAS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD.(II) VINOD PATEL, PLOT NO.885, FLAT NO.3A, SATYAM NIVAS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD (III) KISHORE PATEL, PLOT NO.886, FLAT NO.2B, SHIVKRUPA R ESIDENCY, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD. (IV) ROHIT PATEL, PLOT NO. 886, FLAT NO.2B, SHIVKRUPA RESIDENCY, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD. (V) TARUN PATEL, PLOT NO. 887, FLAT NO.3C, ANAND NIVAS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR COLONY, K UKATPALLY, HYDERABAD. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2), HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 6, HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 6, HYDERABAD 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE