M/s SK Woollen Mills, Panipat V. ACIT, Panipat

ITA 1725/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3507 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIT LAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.L.P.SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-1725/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) S.K.WOLLEN MILLS, SEC.25, PLOT NO.19, PANIPAT. PAN-AARFS3884K. ( APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH. AMRIT LAL, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 05.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19.04.2017 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), KARNAL DATED 31.12.2012 FOR A.Y. 2009-1 0. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE FOR HEARING, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTEND THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE LD.CIT(A) REPRODUCED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN TH E IMPUGNED ORDER AND NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PURSUE TH E APPEAL, DESPITE BEING PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY, AND AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT F URNISHED ANY DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF T HE AO WAS UPHELD AND THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. LD.DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. AFTER HEARING SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.DR, WE ARE O F THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONCILIATION AT THE LEVEL OF LD.C IT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER REPRODUCING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SIMPLY DISMI SS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PURSUE THE APPEAL. ACCORDING TO SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT, THE LD.CIT(A) IS REQUIRE D TO MENTION POINT OF DETERMINATION AND REASONS FOR DECISIONS IN THE APPE LLATE ORDER WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN IF THE A SSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) IS REQUIRED TO PASS A REASONED ORDER. THE LD.CIT(A) SIMPLY DISMISS THE APPEAL BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PURSUE THE APPEAL. 5. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE SET ASIDE THE ORD ER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE- DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY GIVING REASONA BLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND SHAL L PASS REASONED ORDER STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (L.P.SAHU) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE:- 19 TH APRIL, 2017 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT R EGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI