Shri Dasarathsinh Ghanshyamsinh Chudasama, Bhavnagar V. DCIT, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

ITA 1865/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7601 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Ahmedabad
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 31-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BIREN SHAH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 1865/AHD/2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) SHRI DASARATHSINH GHANSHYAMSINH CHUDASAMA A-56, MARKETING YARD, CHITRA, BHAVNAGAR / VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AGBPC3921H ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI BIREN SHAH, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI L. P. JAIN, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 27/01/2020 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29/01/2020 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, AHMEDABAD (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 16.07.2018 ARI SING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.11.2017 PASSED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER (AO) UNDER S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE AC T) CONCERNING AY 2015-16. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS RAIS ED SEVERAL GROUNDS ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ITA NO. 1865/AHD/18 [SHRI DASARATHSINH G. CHUDASAMA VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IT IS NOTICED THAT ONE OF THE S UBSTANTIVE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREBY THE ASSESSEE SEEKS T O IMPUGN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) TOWARDS ALLEGED VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND DISPOSAL OF FIRST APPELLATE ORDER EX PARTE . 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LEA RNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FI LED BEFORE THE CIT(A) BY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE ATTENDED OWING TO DISP UTE BETWEEN THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND THE ASSESSEE AND CONSEQUEN TLY, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND BEFORE THE CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITT ED THAT BY NON- REPRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DOE S NOT STAND TO ANY BENEFIT AT ALL AND THUS, NONATTENDANCE SHOULD NOT B E PRESUMED TO HAVE OCCASIONED DELIBERATELY OR ON ACCOUNT OF CULPABLE N EGLIGENCE OR ON ACCOUNT OF MALAFIDES. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT T HAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE , THE CIT(A) HAS NOT RENDERED ANY DECISIONS ON MER ITS AS OBLIGATED UNDER S.250(6) OF THE ACT. IT WAS THUS URGED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SUFFERS FROM VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUS TICE AND HENCE REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 4. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) . 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE ST RAIGHTWAY REFER TO SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT WHICH ENJOINS THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION BEFORE IT AND THE DECISION SHALL BE RENDERED ON SUCH POINTS ALONGWITH REASONS FOR THE DECISION. IT WAS THUS INCUMBENT UPON THE CIT(A) TO DEAL WITH THE GROUNDS ON MERITS EVEN IN AN EX PARTE ORDER. A BARE GLANCE OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SH OWS THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT ADDRESSED ITSELF ON THE VARIOUS POINTS PLACED F OR ITS DETERMINATION AT ALL AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE FOR DEFAUL T IN APPEARANCE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE CIT(A) PLAYS ROLE OF BOTH ADJU DICATING AUTHORITY AS ITA NO. 1865/AHD/18 [SHRI DASARATHSINH G. CHUDASAMA VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 3 - WELL AS APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THUS, THE CIT(A) COUL D NOT HAVE SHUNNED THE APPEAL FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITHOUT ADDRESSING TH E ISSUE ON MERITS. 6. IN THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONSIDER IT JUST AND EXPEDIENT TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE CIT(A) IN THE LAR GER INTEREST OF JUSTICE WITH A VIEW TO ENABLE THE ASSESSEE TO AVAIL PROPER OPPORTUNITY FOR DISPOSAL OF APPEAL BY THE CIT(A) ON VARIOUS POINTS. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL EXTEND FULL CO-OPERATION TO THE CIT( A) WITHOUT ANY DEMUR, FAILING WHICH, THE CIT(A) SHALL AT LIBERTY TO CONCL UDE THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HENCE, THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) APPEALED AGAINST, IS SET ASIDE AND ALL THE ISSUES R AISED IN THE IMPUGNED APPEAL ARE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPO RTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR K EDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 29/01/2020 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29/01/2 020 , C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 1865/AHD/2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) SHRI DASARATHSINH GHANSHYAMSINH CHUDASAMA A-56, MARKETING YARD, CHITRA, BHAVNAGAR / VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AGBPC3921H ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI BIREN SHAH, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI L. P. JAIN, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 27/01/2020 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29/01/2020 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, AHMEDABAD (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 16.07.2018 ARI SING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.11.2017 PASSED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER (AO) UNDER S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE AC T) CONCERNING AY 2015-16. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS RAIS ED SEVERAL GROUNDS ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ITA NO. 1865/AHD/18 [SHRI DASARATHSINH G. CHUDASAMA VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IT IS NOTICED THAT ONE OF THE S UBSTANTIVE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREBY THE ASSESSEE SEEKS T O IMPUGN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) TOWARDS ALLEGED VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND DISPOSAL OF FIRST APPELLATE ORDER EX PARTE . 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LEA RNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FI LED BEFORE THE CIT(A) BY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE ATTENDED OWING TO DISP UTE BETWEEN THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND THE ASSESSEE AND CONSEQUEN TLY, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND BEFORE THE CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITT ED THAT BY NON- REPRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DOE S NOT STAND TO ANY BENEFIT AT ALL AND THUS, NONATTENDANCE SHOULD NOT B E PRESUMED TO HAVE OCCASIONED DELIBERATELY OR ON ACCOUNT OF CULPABLE N EGLIGENCE OR ON ACCOUNT OF MALAFIDES. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT T HAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE , THE CIT(A) HAS NOT RENDERED ANY DECISIONS ON MER ITS AS OBLIGATED UNDER S.250(6) OF THE ACT. IT WAS THUS URGED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SUFFERS FROM VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUS TICE AND HENCE REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 4. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) . 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE ST RAIGHTWAY REFER TO SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT WHICH ENJOINS THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION BEFORE IT AND THE DECISION SHALL BE RENDERED ON SUCH POINTS ALONGWITH REASONS FOR THE DECISION. IT WAS THUS INCUMBENT UPON THE CIT(A) TO DEAL WITH THE GROUNDS ON MERITS EVEN IN AN EX PARTE ORDER. A BARE GLANCE OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SH OWS THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT ADDRESSED ITSELF ON THE VARIOUS POINTS PLACED F OR ITS DETERMINATION AT ALL AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE FOR DEFAUL T IN APPEARANCE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE CIT(A) PLAYS ROLE OF BOTH ADJU DICATING AUTHORITY AS ITA NO. 1865/AHD/18 [SHRI DASARATHSINH G. CHUDASAMA VS. DCIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 3 - WELL AS APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THUS, THE CIT(A) COUL D NOT HAVE SHUNNED THE APPEAL FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITHOUT ADDRESSING TH E ISSUE ON MERITS. 6. IN THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONSIDER IT JUST AND EXPEDIENT TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE CIT(A) IN THE LAR GER INTEREST OF JUSTICE WITH A VIEW TO ENABLE THE ASSESSEE TO AVAIL PROPER OPPORTUNITY FOR DISPOSAL OF APPEAL BY THE CIT(A) ON VARIOUS POINTS. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL EXTEND FULL CO-OPERATION TO THE CIT( A) WITHOUT ANY DEMUR, FAILING WHICH, THE CIT(A) SHALL AT LIBERTY TO CONCL UDE THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HENCE, THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) APPEALED AGAINST, IS SET ASIDE AND ALL THE ISSUES R AISED IN THE IMPUGNED APPEAL ARE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPO RTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR K EDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 29/01/2020 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29/01/2 020