Mukesh Gandalal Thadeshwar, Valsad V. ITO, Ward-5, Valsad

ITA 2/SRT/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2503 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-01-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUPAMA SINGLA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.02/SRT/2022 (Ǔनधा[रणवष[ / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Mukesh Gandalal Thadeshwar, 86/Sona Sarita, Near Swaminarayan School, Abrama, Dharampur Road, Valsad-396001. Vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Valsad. èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AETPT6267L (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, AR Revenue by: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR स ु नवाईकȧतारȣख/ Date of Hearing : 28/01/2022 घोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), [in short ‘ld. CIT(A)’], Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1037513643(1) dated 06.12.2021 which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) dated 27.09.2017. 2. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and order being an ex parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. Learned Counsel submits before the Bench that ground no. 4 and ground no. 4.1 raised during the appellate proceedings have not been adjudicated by ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel also pleads that last two occasions i.e., on 25.08.2021 and 21.10.2021, the assessee could not receive notices of hearings before the ld. CIT(A), therefore assessee could not represent Page | 2 ITA No.02/SRT/2022 Assessment Year. 2011-12 Mukesh Gandalal Thadeshwar his case before the ld. CIT(A). Hence, Learned Counsel contended that one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to plead his case before the first appellate authority. 3. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 28/01/2022 at the time of Virtual Court Hearing. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER lwjr /Surat / Ǒदनांक/ Date: 28/01/2022 SAMANTA Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat