Smt. Rekha Ravish Kamath, Devanahalli V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bengaluru

ITA 2035/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9367 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJEET SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 2035/BANG/2019 A.Y. 20 16 - 1 7 APPELLANT BY : SRI. PRANAV KRISHNA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SRI. MANJEET SINGH, ADDL. CIT - DR ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 30/07/19 PASSED BY LD. CIT (A)-1. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING REPRESENTED BY ASSESSEE AS PER LAW. HE SUBMITTED THAT, LD. CIT (A) HAS DISMISSED S MT. REKHA RAVISH KAMATH , VILLA NO.9, SOBHA LIFE STYLE, THGONDANA HOSAHALLI, DEVANAHALLI. PAN NO : ACQPK0370D VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6 TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. DATE OF HEARING : 06.01.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.01.2020 ITA NO. 2035/B/2019 A.Y: 2016-17 2 THE APPEAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION FOLLOWING DECISION IN CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 . 2.1. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT (A) POSTED THE CASE FOR HEARING ONLY ON 2 DATES BEING 18/07/19 AND 30/07/19 THEREBY NOT GRANTED FAIR CHANCE TO ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HER CASE. HE THUS REQUESTED FOR THE ISSUE TO BE SENT BACK TO LD. CIT (A). 3. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH SIDES IN LIGHT OF RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. 4.1. AT THE OUTSET WE NOTE THAT LD. CIT (A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION BY FOLLOWING CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD (SUPRA) . IN OUR VIEW LD. CIT (A) CANNOT DISMISS THE APPEAL WITHOUT DECIDING THE ISSUES ON MERITS. FURTHER IT IS OBSERVED THAT ONLY TO CHANCES WAS OFFERED TO ASSESSEE WITHIN A SHORT PERIOD OF 2 WEEKS AND UPON BEING NON-REPRESENTED DISMISSED THE APPEAL WHICH IS IN TOTAL VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE BACK TO LD. CIT (A) WITH A CLEAR DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS AND TO PASS A DETAILED ORDER AFTER AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/- SD/- (B. R. BASKARAN) (BEENA PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 07-01-2020 ITA NO. 2035/B/2019 A.Y: 2016-17 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2. RESPONDENT; 3. CIT; 4. CIT(A); 5. DR 6. ITO (TDS) 7. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR