Mayur Ratilal Kanabar, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 224/RJT/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2360 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 224 / RJT/2 01 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 07 - 08 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (CONDUCTED THROUGH E - COURT AT AHMEDABAD) [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND KUL BHARAT JM ] ITA NO. 224 /RJT/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 07 - 08 MAYUR RATILAL KANABAR .......... ...... ... .. . ..... AP P ELLANT C/O. VISION EVENT & MEDIA, 79, 1 ST FLOOR, MANAGEMENT ENCLAVE, VASTRAPUR, AHMEDABAD. [PAN: A LGPK 1153 K ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, . .......... .... ...... ..................RESPONDENT WARD 1(4), RAJKOT. APPEARANCES BY: NONE F OR THE APPELLANT V.K. CHAKRAVARTY FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : DECEMBER 31 ST , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JANUARY 19 TH , 2016 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM: 1. BY W A Y OF THIS A PPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF T HE ORDER DATED 12.12.2013, DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LEMINI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08. 2. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE BUT WE HAVE HEAR D THE LD . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD . IN VIEW OF THE SMALLN ESS OF THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO PROCEED EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT AND DECIDE THE MA TT ER ON MERIT S . 3. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPE A L , ONLY A FEW MA T ERIAL FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NO T E OF. IN T HE PRESENT CASE , T HE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SEC T ION 144 RE A D WITH SECTION ITA NO . 224 / RJT/2 01 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 07 - 08 PAGE 2 OF 2 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 ( THE ACT HEREINAFTER) . AGGRIEVED BY WHICH , THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD . CI T( A ). AS IT APPEARS FR OM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD , NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT (A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON THE SHORT GROUND OF NON - APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE. THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ON MERITS IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) . T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE ORDER OF LD . CIT(A) AND IS IN A PPEAL BEFORE US. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND HAVING PURSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF LD . C IT ( A ) FOR ADJUDICATION DENOVO I N THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND SIT UATION THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED SUMMARILY WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE MERITS OF THE GRIEVANCES RAISED BEFORE TH E LD . CIT ( A ) . SO FAR AS THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS CONCERNED , AS IS THE SETTLED LEGAL POSITION , WHETHER THE APPELLANT AP PEAR S BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OR NOT , THE MATTER IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERIT S . THERE CANNOT BE ANY OCCASION TO DISMISS THE APPEAL SUMMARILY MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MAT T ER , THE APPEAL IS REQUIRED TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD . CIT ( A ) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERIT S ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD. WHILE DOING SO , THE LD . C IT(A) SHALL GIVE YE T ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE TO DECIDE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY WAY A SP E AKING OR DER AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE DIRECT SO. 5. IN THE RESULT , APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH E 19 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 6 . SD/ - SD/ - KUL BHARAT PRAMOD K UMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD , THE 19 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 6 COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FI LE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT