Satya Madhav Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Mathura V. CIT (A) National faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

ITA 177/AGR/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9052 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 251

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘DB’ : AGRA BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) ITA No.177/AGR/2022 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Satya Madhav Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., vs. ITO 3 (4), 64, Hanuman Bagh Banke Bihari Colony, Mathura. Raman Reiti, Vrindavan, Matura (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAPCS5767C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Deependra Mohan, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17.01.2024 Date of Order : 24.01.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 05.09.2022 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. In this case, in the assessment order, Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.1,20,00,000/-. Upon assessee’s appeal, ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. His laconic order reads as under :- 2 ITA No.177/AGR/2022 “The appellant was sent notices of hearing/submission on 22.01.2021, 15.11.2021, 30.12.2021 & 22.08.2022. There was no reply from the appellant at given address. Therefore, it seems appellant has no interest in pursuing the appeal. Hence, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the assessing officer. In sum, appeal is dismissed.” 3. Against the above order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Ld. Counsel of the assessee prayed that an opportunity may be granted to represent the case properly before the ld. CIT (A). Ld. DR did not oppose the submission. 5. Upon careful consideration, we find that ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. According to section 251 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), no such power is with the ld. CIT (A). Hence, we remit the issue to the file of ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) shall consider the issue afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 24 th day of January, 2024. Sd/- sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 24 th day of January, 2024 TS 3 ITA No.177/AGR/2022 Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT (A). 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.