M/s Dish TV India Ltd., Noida V. ACIT, Noida

ITA 2087/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3668 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S R SENAPATI
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJEEV SAYRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R.S.SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2087/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) DISH TV INDIA LTD., FC-19, FILM CITY, SECTOR-16A NOIDA- 201 301(U.P.) PAN : AAACA5478M VS. A CIT TDS, NOIDA- 201301(U.P.) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. SANJEEV SAYRA, FCA REVENUE BY : SH. S.R.SENAPATI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.1.2018 O R D E R PER BEENA A. PILLAI, J.M : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAIN ST ORDER DATED 29/02/16 PASSED BY LD. CIT (A)-1 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2011-12 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND UND ER THE LAW IN DECIDING THE APPEAL VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 29.02.2016 IN AN EX-PARTE MANNER THEREBY IGNORING ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 23.02.2016 AND THEREFORE, THE IMPUG NED ORDER IS ARBITRARY, UNJUST AND ILLEGAL. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE REJECTED THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION MOVED BY THE APPELLANT BY SAYING THAT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 2 ITA NO. 2087.DEL.2016 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAVING NOT GIVEN ANY VALID REASONS FOR APPLYING SECTION 194J AS AGAINST SECTION 194-C OF I.T. ACT A S APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANTS CASE, THE IMPUGNED APPELLA TE ORDER IS ARBITRARY, UNJUST AND ILLEGAL. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS BY HOLDIN G THAT THE DISPUTE IS ALREADY COVERED IN THE EARLIER APPEALS AND HAS IGNO RED THAT THE FACTS OF PRESENT APPEAL ARE DIFFERENT FROM EARLIER APPEALS. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER :- APPEAL IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST O RDER DATED 21/03/14 PASSED BY LD. AO UNDER SECTION 201(1 ) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT RAISING A DEMAND OF RS. 15,78,10 8/-IS AND RS. 94,51,527/-RESPECTIVELY. 3. AT THE OUTSET LD.AR TODAY SUBMITTED THAT THE ORD ER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) WAS AN EX PARTE ORDER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25/02/16 WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A LETTER OF ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS REJECTED AND LD. CI T (A) PASSED THE ORDER WITHOUT GRANTING A FAIR HEARING TO ASSESS EE. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) AND OBSERVED THAT NONE HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUST ICE WE ARE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD . CIT (A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IS BY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSE SSEE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT LD. CIT (A) SHALL GRANT PROPER OPPORTUN ITY TO ASSESSEE AS PER LAW. ACCORDINGLY GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSES SEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE STANDS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3 ITA NO. 2087.DEL.2016 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 .01.2018. SD/- SD/- (R.S.SYAL) (BEENA A. PILLAI) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 31.01.2018 BINITA COPY OF ORDER TO: - 1) THE APPELLANT; 2) THE RESPONDENT; 3) THE CIT; 4) THE CIT(A)-, NEW DELHI; 5) THE DR, I.T.A.T., NEW DELHI; TRUE COPY BY ORDER I TAT, NEW DELHI S.NO. DETAILS DATE 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 2 9 .0 1 .201 8 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 2 9 .0 1 .201 8 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 2 9 .01.2018 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 10 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER 4 ITA NO. 2087.DEL.2016 5 ITA NO. 2087.DEL.2016