B.Sudha, CHENNAI V. ACIT, Tambaram

ITA 218/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9400 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 09-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNANJCIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 15

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . /ITA NO. 218/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 SMT. B. SUDHA, PROP. M VEE G CONSTRUCTIONS, NO.42, 2 ND MAIN ROAD, 4 TH STREET, SADASIVA NAGAR, MADIPAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 091. PAN AAOPS9687F ( /APPELLANT) V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-I, TAMBARAM. ( / RESPONDENT) ' # / APPELLANT BY : NONE ' # / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT $ ' %& / DATE OF HEARING : 09.05.2016 '( ' %& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.05.2016 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DATED 4. 12.2015. - - ITA 218/16 2 2. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO NON-GIVING OF OPPORTUNITY BY THE AO BEFOR E PASSING THE PENALTY ORDER. 3. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE PROCEED TO D ECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY OF ` 15 LAKHS U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ACCORDING TO THE AO, THO UGH THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 11.12.2009, WHICH WAS INF ORMED BY THE AOS LETTER DATED 3.12.2009, NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, HE PASSED THE EX PARTE PENALTY OR DER LEVYING PENALTY OF ` 15 LAKHS U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT EX PARTE ORD ER WAS PASSED BY THE AO WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(APPEALS), HOW EVER, CONFIRMED THE LEVY OF PENALTY ON MERIT. 5. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR, IN OUR OPINION, IT IS NOT PROPER ON THE PART OF THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AG AINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NO POWER TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRES H CONSIDERATION, - - ITA 218/16 3 IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.251(1)(A) OF THE A CT AND THE POWER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK T O THE FILE OF THE AO HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN W.E.F. 1.6.2001. IN OUR OPINION, THE TRIBUNAL HAS THE POWER TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO T HE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH DIRECTION T O GIVE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HER CASE A ND DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 9 TH OF MAY, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ). $ + ) ( , - ) ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) (CHANDRA POOJARI) >? /JUDICIAL MEMBER & >?/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, F> /DATED, THE 9 TH MAY, 2016. MPO* >G ' %HI JI% /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. $ K% () /CIT(A) 4. $ K% /CIT 5. ILM % /DR 6. MN O /GF.