FIROZ AZIZ SAYED, MUMBAI V. ITO 24(1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 1728/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9429 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM TIWARI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH JOSHI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) I.T.A. NO. 1728 /MUM/ 2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 1 - 1 2 ) FIROZ AZIS SAYED BUILDING NO. 5D/604 PATLIPUTRA NAGAR MHADA COLONY NEAR OSHIWARA BUS DEPOT JOGESHWARI WEST MUMBAI - 400 102. PAN : BFOPS8310B VS. ITO 24(1)(3) 606, 6 TH FLOOR PIRAMAL CHAMBERS LALBAUGH PAREL MUMBAI - 400 012. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAMESH JOSHI DEPARTMENT BY SHRI RAM TIWARI DATE OF HEARING 1 8 .9. 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMEN T 18 . 9 . 201 7 O R D E R THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DA T ED 26.12.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 36, MUMBAI AND IT RELATED TO A.Y. 2011 - 12. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRM ING ALL THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A HAWKER SELLING FABRICS ON THE ROAD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTI CE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT SINCE DEPOSITS OF AROUND ` 26 L AKHS WAS FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144 OF THE ACT TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGEMENT. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO THE ASSES SEE DID NOT APPEAR AND FILED LETTER S OF ADJOURNMENT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) GRANTED TWO OPPORTUNITIES AND FINALLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. FIROZ AZIZ SAYED 2 3. LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROPERLY INS TRU CTED IN THIS MATTER AND ACCORDINGLY P RAYED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE PROPERLY. 4 . I HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. S INCE BOTH THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAVE PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER, WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSE E, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT , IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE PROPERLY BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS F AILED TO APPEAR BEFORE BOTH THE AUTHORITIES , I AM OF THE V IEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE IMPOSED A COST. ACCORDINGLY, I IMPOSE A COST OF ` 5000/ - UPON THE ASSESSEE , WHICH SHALL BE PAID ON OR BEFORE 30.9.2017 TO THE CREDIT OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AS OTHER FEES'. SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF ABOVE COST, I SET A SIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND RESTORE ALL THE MATTERS TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINING THEM AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS T REATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 8 . 9 . 201 7. SD/ - (B.R.BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 1 8 / 9 / 20 1 7 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI