PRABIR FOOD STUFF FACTORY, AMRITSAR V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

ITA 19/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8390 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2019
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIB UNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSA R BEFORE SH. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.19/ASR/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 PRABIR FOOD STUFF FACTORY, VILL. VERPAL, NEAR GOHLWAR RAILWAY STATION, AMRITSAR [PAN:AAIFP 1035E] VS. DY. CIT CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. CHARAN DASS (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING: 26.08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.10.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ORDER DATED 21.09.2017 IMPUGNED HEREIN PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-1, AMRITSAR U/S 250(6) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT) WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE AND AFFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. ITA N0.19/ASR/ 2018 (A. Y: 2012 -13 ) PRABIR FOOD STUFF FACTORY VS. DCIT 2 2. IT IS TRITE TO SAY THAT EVERY PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AND BE HEARD WHEN ALLEGATIONS ARE BEING PUT TOWARDS HIM OR H ER . IF NO OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE PARTY EFFECTED, THE N IT SHALL AMOUNT TO VIOLATIONS OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WHI CH EMBEDDED IN LATIN WORDS AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM WHICH MEANS HEAR T HE OTHER SIDE, OR NO MAN SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UN-HEARD OR BOTH THE SIDES MUST BE HEARD BEFORE PASSING ANY ORDER. THE PRINCIPLE OF AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM IS THE BASIC CONCEPT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND HAS NOT EVOLVED FROM THE CONSTITUTION BUT EVOLVED THROUGH CIVI LIZATION AND MANKIND AND IS THE CONCEPT OF COMMON LAW, WHICH IMPLIES F AIRNESS, REASONABLENESS, EQUALITY AND EQUITY. IN INDIA, THE PRI NCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ARE THE GROUNDS OF ARTICLE 14 AND 21 OF THE CON STITUTION. ARTICLE 14 ENSHRINES THAT EVERY PERSON SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALL Y. IN THE LANDMARK CASE OF MANEKA GANDHI VS. THE UNION OF INDIA (1978 AIR 597) , IT HAS BEEN HELD BY CONSTITUTION BENCH OF THE APEX COU RT THAT THE LAW AND PROCEDURE MUST BE OF A FAIR, JUST AND REASONABLE KI ND. THE DOCTRINE ENSURES A FAIR HEARING AND FAIR JUSTICE TO BOTH THE PARTIES. UNDER THIS DOCTRINE, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE THE RIGHT T O SPEAK. THE AIM OF THIS PRINCIPLE IS TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE PAR TIES TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. BEFORE THE COURT, BOTH THE PARTIES ARE EQUAL AND AR E ENTITLEMENT OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT THEM. I F THE ORDER IS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITY WITHOUT PROVIDING THE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD TO THE PERSON AFFECTED BY IT ADVERSELY WILL BE INVALID AND SHA LL BE LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT APPEARS FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THA T DESPITE SEVERAL NOTICES, NO SUBMISSION HAS BEEN FILED BY TH E APPELLANT AND MANY TIMES THE RESPECTIVE NOTICES WERE RECEIVED BACK UN DELIVERED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND ONLY ONCE SH. P.S. ANEJA, ADVOCATE APPEA RED AND REQUESTED FOR ITA N0.19/ASR/ 2018 (A. Y: 2012 -13 ) PRABIR FOOD STUFF FACTORY VS. DCIT 3 ADJOURNMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . HOWEVER, FROM THE ORDER IT DOES CLEAR AS TO WHAT HAPPENED THEREAFTER. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER EX-PARTE BY MENTIONING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS NOT CO-OPERATED AND FAILED TO PROVIDE/FURNISH ANY S UBMISSION/REPLY/ EVIDENCE/INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS . 4. FROM THE ORDER, IT DOES NOT REFLECTS THAT THE NOTICES OF THE HEARING HAVE EVER BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE OR NOT A ND EVEN MODE OF SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN SPECIFIED, THEREFORE IT CANN OT BE PRESUMED THAT PROPER NOTICES HAVE BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND IN SPITE OF RECEIVING NOTICES THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATT END THE PROCEEDINGS NOR FILED ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION. FROM THE O RDER IMPUGNED IT REFLECTS THAT THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED, AS IT IS FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT NO ONE CAN B E REMAIN UN-HEARD , THEREFORE I N THE PECULIAR FACTS OF CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH, SUFFICE TO SAY WHILE AFFORDING PROPER OP PORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE/APPELLANT TO EXTEND ITS FUL L CO- OPERATION AND PARTICIPATION IN THE APPELLATE PROCEED INGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS AND WHEN REQUIRED AND IN CASE OF DEFAULT, THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE SUBJECTED TO ANY LENIENCY. ITA N0.19/ASR/ 2018 (A. Y: 2012 -13 ) PRABIR FOOD STUFF FACTORY VS. DCIT 4 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STA NDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09/1 0/2019. SD/- SD/- (B.R.BASKARAN) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: 09/10/2019. /PK/ PS. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THEN CIT(APPEALS) 5. SR DR, I.T.A.T. AMRITSAR 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER