Shamsher Singh , Haryana V. Income Tax Ofiice Ward 1, Jind Haryana

ITA 1849/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8354 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVEEN GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1849/Del/2021 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Shamsher Singh, S/o- Sh. Kali Ram, V.P.O. Khardwal, Tehsil Narwana Jind, Haryana Vs. Income tax Officer, Ward-1, Jind, Haryana PAN :BAQPS7796N (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 24.06.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana, for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. The basic grievance of the assessee is against the ex-parte disposal of assessee’s appeal by learned Commissioner (Appeals). Appellant by Sh. Naveen Gupta, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr.DR Date of hearing 23.02.2022 Date of pronouncement 23.02.2022 2 ITA No.1849/Del/2021 AY: 2010-11 3. As could be seen from the facts on record, the assessee is a resident individual. For the assessment year under dispute, the assessee filed his return of income on 30.03.2011, declaring total income of Rs.4,79,530/-. The assessment in case of the assessee was completed under Section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act vide order dated 08.03.2016 making couple of additions aggregating to Rs.4,17,170/-. Against the assessment order so passed, the assessee filed an appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Alleging that despite issuance of several notices of hearing assessee failed to appear and represent his case, learned Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the appeal ex-parte by confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Before us, learned counsel for the assessee forcefully submitted that adequate opportunity of being heard was not extended to the assessee by learned Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Per contra, learned Departmental Representative submitted, the matter may be restored back to learned Commissioner (Appeals) for de-novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to co-operate in disposal of the appeal. 6. Having considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record, we are of the view that the assessee deserves 3 ITA No.1849/Del/2021 AY: 2010-11 a fair opportunity of being heard to contest the additions made by the Assessing officer. Admittedly, for whatever may be the reason, the assessee was unable to represent the case before learned Commissioner (Appeals), for which reason it was decided ex- parte. Considering, the above, we are inclined to restore the matter back to learned Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the issues raised by the assessee afresh. The grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23 rd February, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (B.R.R. KUMAR) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23 rd February, 2022. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi