Smt. Daksha P.Shah, Baroda V. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-3(1), Baroda

ITA 2197/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8196 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2197/AHD/2014 SMT DAKSHA P SHAH VS. ITO ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND RAJPAL YADAV JM] ITA NO. 2197/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 SMT DAKSHA P SHAH ..................APPELLA NT 301, AMEEDHARA, VRUNDAVAN COLONY, ELLORA PARK, BARODA 390 007 [PAN : AJOPS 2924 C] VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ............................RESPONDENT WARD 3 (1), VADODARA APPEARANCES BY: ASEEM THAKKAR FOR THE APPELLANT MUDIT NAGPAL FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 25.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 27.10.2017 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM: 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST LEARNED CIT(A)-II, BARODAS EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 03.02.2014 IN THE MATTER OF PENALTY UN DER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 61 DAYS, BUT THE AS SESSEE HAS MOVED A CONDONATION PETITION, ON WHICH WE HAVE HEARD BOTH T HE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE IS A VERY SENIOR CITIZEN AND, IS IN HER 70S, AND IS LIVI NG IN USA WITH HER SON. SHE PERIODICALLY VISITS INDIA AND, FOR THIS REASON, THE RE WAS A DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. THE EXPLANATION SO GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE APPEALS TO US AND WE, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DELAY. 3. WE NOW PROCEED TO TAKE UP THE MATTER ON MERITS. COMING TO THE APPEAL ON MERITS, WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSES SEE DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICES OF HEARING ISSUED BY HIM. THERE IS NO ADJU DICATION ON MERITS AT ALL. 4. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT TH E NOTICES WERE NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND THERE WAS THUS A BONA FIDE REASON FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES. IN ANY CASE, LE ARNED COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT IT IS NOT OPEN TO THE CIT(A) TO SUMMARILY DISMISS THE APPEAL WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE MERITS OF THE GRIEVANCES RAISED BEFORE HIM. HE THUS CONTENDS THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS AFTER GIVING YET ANOTHER ITA NO. 2197/AHD/2014 SMT DAKSHA P SHAH VS. ITO ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 PAGE 2 OF 2 OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER UNDERTAKES TO SCRUPULOUSLY COMPLY WITH ALL THE NOTICES OF HEARING ISSUED BY TH E CIT(A). LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, DOES NOT OPPOSE THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT SUBMITS THAT WE SHOULD GIVE PROPER DIRECTION SO AS TO ENSURE PROPER COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICES OF HEARING IN FUTURE. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVING PE RUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR MATTER BEING REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS OF THE CAS E AFTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IN COMING T O THIS CONCLUSION, WE HAVE TAKEN NOTE OF THE FACT THAT CIT(A) HAD A STATUTORY OBLIGA TION TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON MERITS, AND, THEREFORE, HE HAS CLEARLY COMMITTED AN ERROR B Y DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SUMMARILY. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO ENSURE TH AT THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(A) IS PROPERLY REPRESENTED AND THE NOTICES OF HEARING ARE DULY COMPLIED WITH. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS AND DIRECTIONS, THE MATTER STAND S REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- RAJPAL YADAV PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 **BT COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: ......27.10.2017.- ... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: ... 27.10.2017........ 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . P.S./P.S.: 27.10.2017....... . 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: . 27.10.2017. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK : ... 30.10.2017... 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK : . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: ..