Mr. Mohan Sambhaji Jagthap, Gurgaon V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1827/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8840 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 14-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GUNJAN PRASHAD
• Assessee Lawyers: MUKESH RANA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

ITA 1827 TO 1830/DEL/2013 ASSTT.YEARS: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1827, ITA 1828, 1829, 1830/DEL/2013 ASSTT. YEARS: 2007-08, 2002-03, 2006-07, 2005-0 6 MOHAN SAMBHAJI JAGTHAP, VS ACI T, 2995, SECTOR 23, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, GURGAON. NEW DELHI. (PAN: ACJPJ3988R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI MUKESH RANA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI GUNJAN PRASHAD, CIT DR O R D E R PER CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, J.M. THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A)-I, NEW DELHI ALL DATE D 7.1.2013 IN APPEAL NO. 47/11-12, 45/11-12, 44/11-12 AND 43/11-12 FOR AY 20 02-03, 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL FOUR APPEAL S MAY KINDLY BE TAKEN UP FIRST. LD. DR AGREED TO THAT. GROUND NO. 2 OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL FOUR APPEALS READS AS UNDER:- 2. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGA INST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ITA 1827 TO 1830/DEL/2013 ASSTT.YEARS: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06 2 2. APROPOS GROUND NO.2, WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED ON R ECORD. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PARA 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AO ISSUED SEVERAL NOTICES FI XING THE DATE OF HEARING AFTER A FEW DAYS BUT THE AO HAS NOT DRAWN ANY CONCL USION WHEN DESPITE DUE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REP RESENTATIVE REMAINED ABSENT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. LD. COUN SEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) PARA 9 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE RAISED GROUND NO. 9 BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ALLEGING THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO WAS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BUT THE CIT(A) DID NO T PAY ANY HEED TO GROUND NO. 9 OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CIT(A) DISMISSED GROU ND NO. 9 WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION BY HOLDING THAT THE SAME IS GENERAL/CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATI ON. 3. LD. DR CONTENDED THAT IF ASSESSEE IS NOT COOPERA TING DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THEN THE AO HAS NO ALTERNAT IVE BUT TO COMPLETE PROCEEDINGS EX PARTE, IN TIME BARRED CASES. HOWEVE R, LD. DR FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT IF IT IS FOUND JUST AND PROPER, THE DEPARTMENT HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION IF ALL THE APPEALS ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR A FRESH ADJUDICATION. ITA 1827 TO 1830/DEL/2013 ASSTT.YEARS: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06 3 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND OBSERVATION OF THE AO IN PARA 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS NOTED AND S UBMITTED BEFORE US HEREINABOVE AND APPROACH OF THE CIT(A) ABOUT GROUND NO. 9 OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND WE HAVE NO HESITATION TO HOLD THAT THIS IS A CLEAR VIOLATION O F PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ON THE PART OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THUS, WE ARE O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN ALL FOUR APPEALS DESERVE TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR A FRESH DE NOVO ADJUDICA TION. THEREFORE, IMPUGNED ORDERS AS WELL AS ASSESSMENT ORDERS IN ALL THESE FO UR CASES ARE SET ASIDE AND THESE CASES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR A FR ESH DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE AO DURING ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 2 OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL FO UR APPEALS IS ALLOWED. 5. SINCE BY THE EARLIER PART OF THIS ORDER, WE HAVE RESTORED ALL FOUR CASES TO THE FILE OF AO FOR A FRESH DE NOVO REASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, OTHER GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE DO NOT SURVIVE FOR ADJUDICATION BY THIS TRIBUNAL. FINALLY, ALL FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DEEMED TO BE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA 1827 TO 1830/DEL/2013 ASSTT.YEARS: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06 4 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.01.2015. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (CHANDRAMOHAN GARG) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 27TH JANUARY, 2015 GS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T.(A) 4. C.I.T. 5. DR BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR