Questnet Enterprises India Private Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1822/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57884 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JUNIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: G NARAYANASAMY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.1821 & 1822/MDS/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2007-08) M/S QUESTNET ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIN TREE PLACE, 9 TH FLOOR, NO.7, MC NICHOLS ROAD, CHETPET, CHENNAI - 600 041 PAN : AAACQ1177H (APPELLANT) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE V(2), CHENNAI - 600 034 . (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. NARAYANASAMY, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RE NGARAJAN, JUNIOR STANDING COUNSEL DATE OF HEARING : 18.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.01.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT ASSAILS ORDE RS DATED 31.10.2011 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-V , CHENNAI, FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. AS PER THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAD OVERLOOKED ITS REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT AND DIS MISSED THE APPEALS FOR NON-PROSECUTION. I.T.A. NOS.1821 & 1822/MDS/11 2 2. WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP BEFORE US, LEARNED A.R. FILED A LETTER DATED 28 TH OCTOBER, 2011 WHICH CARRIES A STAMP OF OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V, IN WHICH AS SESSEE HAS REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT. THE REASON CITED THEREI N WAS THAT RECORDS WERE SEIZED BY CB-CID, DEPARTMENT OF TAMIL NADU POL ICE AND IT REQUIRED TIME FOR COLLECTING REQUIRED PARTICULARS F ROM THAT. 3. LEARNED D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY, BUT, FAILED TO AVAIL OF S UCH OPPORTUNITY FOR PRESENTING ITS CASE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) . 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE CONTENTIONS. APPEAL BEFORE CI T(APPEALS) UNDER SECTION 246A OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SH ORT 'THE ACT') IS A STATUTORY RIGHT GIVEN TO AN ASSESSEE. AS PER SUB-S ECTION (6) OF SECTION 250 OF THE ACT, WHICH PRESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE TO B E FOLLOWED BY A CIT(APPEALS), AN ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) DISPOSING O F AN APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHOULD STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMIN ATION, THE DECISION TAKEN THEREON AND REASONS FOR THE DECISION. IN OTH ER WORDS, THERE IS NO POWER VESTED ON CIT(APPEALS) TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF AN ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION OR NON-APPEARANCE. HE HAS TO DEAL WITH THE CASE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. IN ANY CASE, HERE, ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN I.T.A. NOS.1821 & 1822/MDS/11 3 APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT ON 28 TH OCTOBER, 2011 AND NOTHING WAS MENTIONED BY CIT(APPEALS) ON SUCH ADJOURNMENT PETI TION. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER HAS TO GO BACK TO CIT(APPEALS) FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH FOR BOTH THE YEARS. WE, T HEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) FOR BOTH THE YEARS AND REMIT IT BACK TO HIM FOR CONSIDERATION DE NOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRESENTING ITS CASE . 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR BOTH THE Y EARS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 18 TH JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 18 TH JANUARY, 2012. KRI. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A)-V, CHENNAI-34 (4) CIT, CHENNAI-III, CHENNAI (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE