P Shuklavardhan Reddy, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-1, Vikarabad, Vikarabad

ITA 21/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6288 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E SUNIL BABU
• Assessee Lawyers: D SATYANARAYANA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NOS 21 AND 22 OF 2015 P PANDURANGA REDDY HYDERA BAD PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.21/HYD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) SHRI P. SHUKLAVARDHAN REDDY, HYDERABAD PAN: ASNPP 2605 H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 1 VIKARABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.22/HYD/2014 A.Y 2011-12 SHRI P. PANDURANGA REDDY, HYDERABAD PAN: ASNPP 2605 H VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 1 VIKARABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI D. SATYANARAYANA FOR REVENUE : SHRI K.E. SUNIL BABU, DR DATE OF HEA R ING : 11.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 .08.2016 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. BOTH ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR THE A.Y 2011-12. TH E ASSESSEES ARE RELATED TO EACH OTHER AS SHRI SHUKLAV ARDHAN REDDY IS THE FATHER OF SHRI P. PANDURANGA REDDY. IN BOTH OF THESE APPEALS, THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AGAINST WHICH THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES FILED THEIR APPEALS BEFORE THE CIT (A). SINCE THE ASSESSEES DID NOT APPEAR BEF ORE THE CIT (A) ON THE FIXED DATES OF HEARING, THE CIT (A) DISMISSE D THE APPEALS ITA NOS 21 AND 22 OF 2015 P PANDURANGA REDDY HYDERA BAD PAGE 2 OF 3 FOR NON PROSECUTION AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEES ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 2. THE ASSESSEES, IN ADDITION TO THE GROUNDS RAISED ALONG WITH THE FORM 36 AGAINST THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO, HAVE ALSO FILED THE ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL THA T THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING TO THE ASSESSEES HEREIN. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARN ED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT TH AT ONLY TWO DATES OF HEARING WERE FIXED AND THE ASSESSEE HAD SO UGHT ADJOURNMENTS ON THESE TWO DATES, BUT THE CIT (A) HA S ERRONEOUSLY DRAWN CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEES WE RE NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE THEIR APPEALS AND HAS ACCORDIN GLY DISMISSED THE APPEALS. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE F ACTS ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ONLY TWO DATES OF HEARING WERE FIXED BY THE CIT (A) I.E. FIRST DATE ON 18.09.2014 AND SECOND DA TE ON 10.10.2014 AND THE CIT (A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 13.10.2014. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT SUFFICIE NT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEES TO PRESENT THE IR CASE BEFORE THE CIT (A). IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSU E IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE CIT (A) SHALL DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL A FTER GIVING THE ASSESSEES A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND BY PASS ING A SPEAKING ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE TREA TED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NOS 21 AND 22 OF 2015 P PANDURANGA REDDY HYDERA BAD PAGE 3 OF 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH AUGUST, 2016. S D/ - S D/ - (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 24 TH AUGUST, 2016. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. ADVOCATE, 102, SHRIYA'S ELEGANCE, 3-6-643 STREET NO .9 HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD, ADVOCATE FLAT NO.102, SHRI YAS ELEGANCE, 3-6-643, STREET NO.9 HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERA BAD 500029 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 VIKARABAD 3. CIT(A) III HYDERABAD 4. CIT II HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER