M/s. Sigma Ventures, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,

ITA 1705/PUN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7742 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE . . . . , , BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / ITA NO. 1704/PUN/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 M/S. SIGMA PROPERTIES, SHIVANA, PLOT NO.85, BHUSARI COLONY, ABOVE ROYAL ENFIELD SHOWROOM, KOTHRUD, PUNE 411 038 PAN : ABJFS6137J . / APPELLANT V/S D CIT , CIRCLE - 3, PUNE . / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO. 1705/PUN/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 M/S. SIGMA VENTURES, SHIVANA, PLOT NO.85, BHUSARI COLONY, ABOVE ROYAL ENFIELD SHOWROOM, KOTHRUD, PUNE 411 038 PAN : ABKFS8611G . / APPELLANT V/S DCIT, CIRCLE - 3, PUNE . / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK REVENUE BY : SHRI VIVEK AGGARWAL / ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM : THERE ARE 2 APPEALS OF THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEES UNDE R CONSIDERATION. THEY ARE FILED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-3, PUNE COMM ONLY DATED 21-09-2015 FOR THE / DATE OF HEARING :09.08.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18.08.2017 2 ITA NOS.1704 AND 1705/PUN/2015 M/S. SIGMA PROPERTIES AND M/S. SIGMA VENTURES COMMON A.Y. 2010-11. ASSESSEES SHARE THE COMMON AD DRESS. THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEALS ARE ALSO PARTLY COMMON. 2. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK, LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMITTED THAT T HESE 2 DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE COMMONLY BELONG TO SHRI SUSHANT MOHAN JADHAV, WHO I S A COMMON PARTNER OF BOTH. THE COMMON ADDRESS IS S.NO.36/3, FLAT NO.B-4 , SHREE SWAMI SAMARTH HOUSING SOCIETY, ERANDWANE, PUNE 411004. THE ASS ESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED IN AN EXPARTE MANNER ON A COMMON DATE OF 26-03-2013. SIMILARLY, THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN BOTH THE CASES WERE ADJUDI CATED IN AN EXPARTE MANNER. FURTHER, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR A TTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSEES WITH THE ADDRESS AT ERANDWANE AS MENTIONED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. IN THE PROCESS, CIT(A) IGNORED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD A CHANGE OF ADDRESS WHICH NOW FALLS IN THE KOTHRUD ARE OF PUNE. HOWEVER, INADVERTENTLY, HEARING NOTICES BY BOTH THE AUTHORITIES WERE NOT SENT TO THE KOTHRUD ADDRESS AND IT RESULTED IN COMPLETION O F BOTH THE ASSESSMENTS AS WELL AS FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN AN EXPARTE MANNER. WITH THESE BACKGROUNDS FACTS RELATING TO THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE, LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT BOTH THE APPEALS MAY BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO INFORMATION ON RECORDS ABOUT THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS. THEREFORE, THE LEGAL ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 4. ON HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND THE FACT OF C HANGE OF ADDRESS TO KOTHRUD, PUNE - 38 IS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORIT IES WHILE ISSUING NOTICES. IT RESULTED IN EXPARTE ASSESSMENTS AS WELL AS EXPARTE ADJUDICATION BY THE AO AND THE CIT(A) RESPECTIVELY. IN EFFECT, THE ISSUES RAISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS WERE THE PRODUCTS OF SUCH EXPARTE ASSESSMENTS/ADJUDICATIONS. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS FAILURE 3 ITA NOS.1704 AND 1705/PUN/2015 M/S. SIGMA PROPERTIES AND M/S. SIGMA VENTURES TO COMPLY WITH THE SET PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTIC E SO FAR AS THE COMMUNICATION TO THE PRESENT ASSESSEES ARE CONCERNED. ASSESSEE HAS THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD MORE SO WHEN AN ADVERSE DECISION IS TAKEN BY THE AUTHORI TIES. ON THIS BASIS ALONE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE FOR REMANDING THE ISSUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE AO IS REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED FAVOURABLY. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. AO IS DIRECTED TO GRANT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE REMAND PROCEE DINGS AS PER THE SET PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THEREFORE, GROUND N OS. 1 AND 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEES IN THE ABOVE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. GROUND S RELATING TO MERITS IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 18 TH AUGUST, 2017. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // //TRUE COPY// SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. 4. THE CIT (A) - 3 , PUNE THE CIT-3, PUNE 5. % , , B BENCH PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE.