Manjeet Singh Bhatia, Indore V. CIT-Range 3 , Indore

ITA 165/Ind/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0148 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR HARSHI BARI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Assessment record; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE - BENCH [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] [AHMEDABAD-INDORE] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.165/IND/2020 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2011-2012 SHRI MANJEET SINGH BHATIA BCC HOUSE, 8/5 MANORAMAGANJ INDORE. VS. JCIT, RANGE-3 INDORE. / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARSH VIJAY WARGIYA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI (DR.) HARSHI BARI, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 06/07/2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14/07/2021 !'# / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER OF LD.CIT(A )-1, INDORE DATED 27.2.2020 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2011-12. 2. IN THE APPEAL MEMO, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS M ANY AS SEVEN GROUNDS OF APPEAL AGAINST ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), W HICH INTER ALIA CHALLENGES VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND CON FIRMED BY THE LD.CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO.1 HA S CHALLENGED BY WAY OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS E RRED IN PASSING AN EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE PROCEED TO ADJUDICATE THIS PRELIMINA RY ISSUE FIRST. ITA NO.165/IND/2020 2 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT AN ASSESSMEN T ORDER DATED 31.3.2014 WAS PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY MAKING VARIOUS ADD ITIONS. THESE ADDITIONS WERE CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE TH E FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. HOWEVER, DESPITE GIVING VARIOUS OPPORTU NITIES, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, AN D IN THE EX PARTE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE AO. THE ASSESSEE GOT AGGRIEVED, AND NOW CAME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN SECOND APPEAL. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, W E HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. A PERUSAL OF THE CIT (A)S ORDER WOULD INDICATE THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ISSUED NOTICES TO T HE ASSESSEE FOR ARGUING THE APPEAL ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AS MENTIONE D BY THE LD.CIT(A) IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AVA IL THE SAME, AND ACCORDINGLY, THE LD.CIT(A) AFTER PUTTING RELIANCE U PON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF P.N. BALASUBRAMANIUM (A) 112 ITR 512 HELD T HAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT AVAILED OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN, HE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR ANY NATURAL JUSTICE. HE DISMISSED APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS PERTINENT TO TAKE NOTE OF SUB-SEC TION (6) OF SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WHICH READS AS UNDER: 6) THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOSI NG OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POIN TS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. 5. ON PERUSAL OF SECTION WOULD INDICATE THAT THE LD .CIT(A) WAS REQUIRED TO FORMULATE POINTS IN DISPUTE, AND THEREA FTER RECORD REASONS ON SUCH POINTS. NO DOUBT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS GIVEN N UMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE TO ATTEND THE HEARING , AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AVAIL AND REMAINED ABSENT, WHICH IPSO FACTO WOULD NOT EMPOWER THE LD.CIT(A) TO PASS AN EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GOING TO THE MERIT OF THE CASES AND WITHOUT MAKING A SPEAKING ORDER, BECAUSE, RATIONALE FOR ITA NO.165/IND/2020 3 PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAI LABLE ON RECORD IS THAT, SUCH ORDER IS SUBJECT TO FURTHER APPEAL, AND SUCH ORDER WOULD ENABLE NOT ONLY THE LITIGANT AND THE APPELLATE AUTH ORITY TO KNOW THE EXACT POINT OF DISPUTE FOR ADJUDICATION. IN THE INS TANT CASE, EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE, THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT T O HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT RECORD AND THEREAFTER FORMED THE POI NT IN DISPUTE, AND SHOULD HAVE RECORDED REASONS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONC LUSIONS ON THOSE POINTS. THE LD.CIT(A) FAILED TO ADHERE THE MANDATO RY PROCEDURE, HENCE HIS ORDER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. WE ALLOW THIS PRELIM INARY GROUND OF APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) F OR FRESH ADJUDICATION. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE, THE ASSESSE E SHALL COOPERATE IN THE SET ASIDE APPELLATE PROCEEDING, AND WOULD NOT I NDULGE IN UNNECESSARY DELAY TACTICS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON _14 TH ___JULY, 2021 AT INDORE. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) VICE-PRESIDENT INDORE, DATED 14 /07/2021 !'# $%& ''& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. ( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. )*) + / CONCERNED CIT 4. + ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &,- $$ , / DR, ITAT, 6. -./ 0 / GUARD FILE. !'# / BY ORDER, 1 / 2 )3 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , ITAT, ITA NO.165/IND/2020 4 1. DATE OF DICTATION : 06-07-2021 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING 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 DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT. : 5. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER PLACED BEFORE OTHER MEMBER : 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P.S./P.S. : 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK. : 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. : 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. : 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER :