M/s K.N.Murthy Jewellers, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward -2, Warangal

ITA 1858/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6411 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1 858 /HYD/12 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 0 6 ) M/S. K.N.MURT HY JEWELLERS, HANAMKONDA ( PAN - AADCA 4278 N ) V/S. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, WARANGAL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM RESPONDENT BY : S MT. K.HARITHA DR DATE OF HEARING 2 1.04.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.04.2014 O R D E R PER SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: TH IS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06. 2. ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE O R DER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) - 18, MUMBAI HOLDING CONCU RRENT JURISDICTION OF CIT(A) - VI, HYDERABAD DATED 11.09.2013 AND THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN THE ASSESSEE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE HIM . 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH T H E O R DER OF THE CIT(A) AND WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS REPRODUCED THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON VARIOUS ISSUES AND AS REGARDS THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS BEFORE HIM, HE HAS OBSERVED THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE APP E ARED NOR SUBMITTED ANY WRITTEN REPLY BEFORE HIM. HE , THERE FORE, PROCEEDED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. THE LEARNED C OUN S EL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PL E ADED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN AMPLE OPPORTUNITY AND SHOULD BE GIVEN ANOTHER ITA NO.1 858 /HYD/201 3 M/S. K.N.MURTHY JEWELLERS, HANMAKONDA 2 OPPO R TUNITY TO REPR E SENT I T S CA S E BEFORE THE CIT (A). TH E LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS ALSO HEARD. 5 . ON PERUSAL OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, WE FIND THAT T HE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DOES NOT SPEAK OF THE NO T I C ES ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE FOR HE A RING BEFORE THE CIT(A). THEREFORE , WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NO T GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORT U NITY TO REPRESENT ITS CASE. IN VIEW O F THE SAME, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE O F TH E CIT(A) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM IN ACCORDANCE WI T H LAW. NE E DLESS TO MENTION , THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H E ARD. 6 . ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPO S ES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 2 1.4.2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( P.MADHAVI DEVI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT/ - 21ST APRIL, 2014 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. K.N.MURTHY JEWELLERS, (HANAMKONDA), C/O. K.VASANT KUMAR, A.V.RAGHRAM, ADVOCATES, 610 BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 1. 2 . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, WARANGAL 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) 18, MUMBAI ITA NO.1 858 /HYD/201 3 M/S. K.N.MURTHY JEWELLERS, HANMAKONDA 3 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) VI, HYDERABAD 5 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX V, HYDERABAD 6 . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE , ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S