Orissa Forestry Sector Development Project, Bhubaneswar V. ACIT(TDS-1), Bhubaneswar

ITA 196/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5413 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: B K MOHAPATRA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.196 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 - 2013 ORISSA FORESTRY SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SFTRI CAMPUS, GHATIKIA, BHUBANESWAR VS. ACIT (TDS) - 1, BHUBANESWAR PAN/GIR NO. AAAAO 0926 C (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.K.MOHAPATRA, , AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 28 /08 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 /08 / 2017 O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 3 , BHUBANESWAR , DATED 15 .1.2016 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 2013 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE ORDER DATED 15.01.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 3, BHUBANESWAR) [CIT(APPEALS)] IN PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL IS AGAINST PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, CONTRARY TO FACTS, ARBITRARY AND ERRONEOUS AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT THE LEARNED C IT (APPEALS) HAS MISCONSTRUED/MIS - APPRECIATED THE FACTS AND HIS CONFIRMING THE DEMAND OF RS. 1,20,920/ - BY HOLDING THAT THE SAME IS ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT DEDUCTION AND SHORT PAYMENT OF TAX IS CONTRARY TO FACTS, ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED, ERRONEOUS AND BAD BOTH IN THE EYE OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 2 ITA NO.196 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 2013 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THERE IS NO SHORT DEDUCTION/ SHORT PAYMENT OF TAX AND ACCORDINGLY CONFIRMING THE DEMAND OF RS. 1,20,920/ - IS ARBI TRARY, UNJUSTIFIED, ERRONEOUS AND BAD BOTH IN THE EYE OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 4. THAT THE ORDER DATED DT. 17.10.2012 U/S.200 A OF THE ACT BEING E RRONEOUS AND BAD IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IN PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL IS ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS AND BAD BOTH IN THE EYE OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 5. THAT THE ASSESSEE DENIES ITS LIABILITY FOR THE LEVY OF INTEREST AND THE SAID INTEREST CHARGED IS INCORRECT, ERRONEOUS AND BAD IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE SAME. 6. THAT THE APPE LLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, SUPPLEMENT, MODIFY THE GROUNDS HEREIN ABOVE BEFORE OR AT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A ) AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING. HE PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT HE PERSONALLY UNDERTA KES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND PRODUCE ALL DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS AS AND WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. 4. LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION OF LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PE RUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED IN HIS ORDER THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 26.4.2014, 13.1.2015, 16.9.2015, 16.11.2015, 22.2.2015 & 15.1.2016 AND NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EXCE PT FILING A WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND, TH EREFORE, THE APPEAL WAS DISMSISED EXPARTE CONSIDERING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3 ITA NO.196 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 2013 6. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER T HAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED ON SIX OCCASIONS WHEN THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM AND HE PASSED THE EXPARTE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. BEFORE US, LD A.R. UNDERTAKES THAT H E WILL APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND FULLY CO - OPERATE WITH THE CIT(A ) IN DISPOSING THE APPEAL EXPEDITIOUSLY . THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, NO HARM WILL BE CAUSED TO THE REVENUE IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A ). THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE ALL THE DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON WHICH IT WISHES TO RELY UPON AS AND WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON /08 /2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - SD/ - (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ( N.S SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED /08 /2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS 4 ITA NO.196 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 2013 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : ORISSA FORESTRY SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SFTRI CAMPUS, GHATIKIA, BHUBANESWAR 2. THE RESPONDENT : ACIT (TDS) - 1, BHUBANESWAR 3. THE CIT(A) - 3, BHUBANESWAR. 4. PR.CIT , - 3, BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//