Shri Mayurbhai Bhavanbhai Prajapati, Anand V. The Income tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

ITA 1901/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 190120514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 15-07-2013
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J P THANGID SS
• Assessee Lawyers: B T THAKKAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM AND SHRI KUL B HARAT, JM) ITA NO.1901/AHD/2010 ( A. Y.2005-06) MAYUR BHAVANHAI PRAJAPATI, C-6, R. S. PLATINUM, NR. SHUBHAM PARTY PLOT, BHALEJ ROAD, ANAND 388 001 P . A. NO. AJBPP 4910 C VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, 2 ND FLOOR, S. P. COMPLEX, MAYFAIR ROAD, ANAND 388 001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI B. T. THAKKAR, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI J. P. THANGID, SS. DR DATE OF HEARING: 15-07- 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14-08-2013 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY: THIS APPEALS IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-IV, BARODA DATED 02-03-2010, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 IN APPEAL NO. CAB/IV-A-1/09-10, PASSED U/S 250 READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS EARLIER DISMISSE D IN DEFAULT BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 01-10-2010. HOWEVER, THE MATTER HAS BEEN RECALLED WHILE ALLOWING THE MISC. APPLICATION OF TH E ASSESSEE BEING M. A. NO. 272/AHD/2010 VIDE ORDER DATED 25-02-2011. ITA NO.1901/AHD/2010(AY-2005-06) MAYUR BHAVANBHAI PRAJAPATI VS ITO,WARD 1, ANAND 2 3. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS EIGHT GROUNDS IN THIS APPEAL, THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE LEARNED C IT(A) HAS PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LEARNED AR SUB MITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A)-IV, BARODA HAS PASSED THE E X-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO THE SHIFTI NG OF THE OFFICE PREMISES, THE NOTICES OF HEARING WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TIME. IT WAS ALSO ARGUED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT EVE N AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE, THE LEARNED AO HAD PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER WITHOUT CALLING FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS REQUIRED FOR FINALIZING TH E ASSESSMENT AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REM ITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL AFRES H AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AU THORITIES WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORD ER SINCE THE ASSESSEE OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WAS NOT PRESENT AT T HE TIME OF HEARING IN SPITE OF SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES BEING PROVIDED. PROB ABLY, THE REASON FOR SUCH NON-APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEAR NED CIT(A) COULD HAVE BEEN RESULTED DUE TO THE EXPLANATION OFFERED B Y THE ASSESSEE VIZ. SHIFTING OF THE OFFICE PREMISES. 6. THE LEARNED DR OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSION MADE B Y THE LEARNED AR AND SUBMITTED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES WERE PR OVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), HOWEVER, THE ASSESS EE AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE PREFERRED TO BE ABSENT AT THE TIME O F HEARING. IT WAS, ITA NO.1901/AHD/2010(AY-2005-06) MAYUR BHAVANBHAI PRAJAPATI VS ITO,WARD 1, ANAND 3 THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE D ESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 7. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE SINCE THE REASON CITED BY THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE GENUINE BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A S HIFT OF OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE FROM BALAKRISHNA SOCIETY, OPPOSITE TO SHIV VADI, BEHIND C. P. COLLEGE, BHALEJ ROAD, ANAND, TO , G-6, R. S. PLATINUM, NR. SUBHAM PARTY PLOT, BHALEJ ROAD, ANAND. THEREFOR E, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION AND AT THE SAME TIME WE A LSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO-OPERATE WITH THE LEARNED CI T(A) DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS FOR SPEEDY DISPOSAL OF THE CASE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14-8-2013 SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/- -- - ITA NO.1901/AHD/2010(AY-2005-06) MAYUR BHAVANBHAI PRAJAPATI VS ITO,WARD 1, ANAND 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: DIRECT ON COMPUTER 15-07-20 13/13-08-13 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 15-07-2013/13-08-13 OTHER MEMBER : 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: