IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1814/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08) M/S. J C DEVELOPERS LAKHANI ISMAILI TUNDIYA & CO. 911-912-913, SPAN TRADE CENTRE, OPP. KOCHARAB ASHRAM, PALDI, AHMEDABAD-380007 APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(2), AHMEDABAD RESPONDENT PAN: AADFJ2665F / BY ASSESSEE : SHRI TEJ SHAH, A.R. / BY REVENUE : SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 24.11.2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.11.2016 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ARISES AGAINST THE CIT(A)-XV, AHMEDABADS ORDER DATED 28 TH MARCH, 2010, IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-XV/9(2)/460/09-10, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECT ION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. ITA NO.1814/AHD/2011 (M/S. J C DEVELOPERS VS. ITO) A.Y. 2007-08 - 2 - 2. WE COME TO ASSESSEES PLEADINGS. IT RAISES TWO FOLDED SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS. THE FIRST ONE CHALLENGES LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL EX PARTE WITHOUT ANY ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. IT LATTER SUBSTANTIVE GROUND ASSAILS CORRECTNESS OF SECTION 4 0(A)(IA) DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUA ASSESSEES LABOUR/TRAN SPORT CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS.13,22,853/- ON THE GROUND THAT IT FAILED TO D EDUCT TDS THEREUPON U/S.194C OF THE ACT FOLLOWED BY THE CONSEQUENTIAL P AYMENT THEREOF IN GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT WITHIN THE SPECIFIED TIME LIMIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY DISPUTE THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED ASSESSEES AP PEAL ON ACCOUNT OF ITS NON APPEARANCE SINCE THE CONCERNED PERSON HAD GONE TO U SA QUA THE SERVICE DATED 30.09.2010. THEREAFTER THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT APPEARS TO BE RETURNED BACK THE NOTICE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD LEFT THE ADDRESS IN QUESTION. IT APPEARS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT APPLI ED HIS MIND IN UPHOLDING THE ABOVE STATED DISALLOWANCE SINCE NO REASONING IS GIVEN IN THE LOWER APPELLATE ORDER. LEARNED COUNSEL REPRESENTING ASSE SSEE SUBMITS THAT IT HAD DULY DEDUCTED TDS UPON THE IMPUGNED PAYMENTS BUT TH E SAME WAS DEPOSITED IN GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT AFTER THE DUE DATE BUT BEFORE FILING OF THE RETURN. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE PLEADS THAT NO RELEVANT DETAIL ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS STAGE. WE OBSERVE IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES THAT THE ASSESSEES ABOVE CONTENTION REQUIRES FACTUAL VERIFICATION AS W ELL. WE ARE FURTHER CONSCIOUS THAT MUCH WATER HAS FLAWN DOWN THE STREAM SINCE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS THAT IT IS LEARNED CIT(A) INSTEAD OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER WHO REQUIRES TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE IN QUESTION ON MERITS IN LARGE R INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE THUS ACCEPT ASSESSEES GROUNDS FOR STATISTICAL PURP OSES AND DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO PASS A DETAILED ORDER AS PER LAW AFTER KE EPING IN MIND ALL NECESSARY FACTS AND EVIDENCE TO BE PRODUCED ON RECORD AT ASSE SSEES BEHEST. THE ITA NO.1814/AHD/2011 (M/S. J C DEVELOPERS VS. ITO) A.Y. 2007-08 - 3 - ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPEAR WITHIN FOUR WEEKS OF GETTING COPY OF THIS ORDER. LD. CIT(A) SHALL THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE WITHIN THREE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016.] SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 24/11/2016 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ! / CONCERNED CIT 4 !- / CIT (A) ( )* + ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1 + 23 4 5 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0