Ashok Oberoi, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2256/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9917 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2256/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 ASHOK OBEROI, C-170, WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI. VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-10, NEW DELHI. TAN/PAN: AAJPO5082H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI APOORVA BHARDWAJ, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 04 02 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17 03 2021 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.02.2016, PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXVII, NEW DEL HI IN RELATION TO THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1)(C) F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAIS ED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE CIT [A] HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT UTILIZING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 251(1 )(C), THAT HE HAS THE POWERS TO DISPOSE OF AN APPEAL IN ANY OTHE R CASE, HE MAY PASS SUCH ORDERS IN THE APPEAL AS HE THINKS FIT . 2. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX -PARTE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD ON THE GROUND OF NON I.T.A. NO.2256/DEL/2016 2 APPEARANCE WHILE THE APPELLANT APPEARED THREE OUT O F 5 TIMES THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING. 3. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL I NVOLVING LARGE AMOUNT OF PENALTY OF RS 14,17,356 WITHOUT GIVING SU FFICIENT TIME TO THE APPELLANT. 2. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS SE EN THAT SAME HAS BEEN PASSED EX-PARTE AND CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.14,17,356/- AS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. LD. CIT(A) HAS NOTED THE FOLLOWING DATE OF HEARI NG AND DETAILS OF NOTICE WHICH IS AS UNDER: S.NO. DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF HEARING DATE OF ADJOURNMENT REMARKS 1. 24.08.2015 10.09.2015 -- NOTICE WAS SENT BY SPEED POST ON 24.08.2015 FIXING THE CASE FOR 10.09.2015. NONE ATTENDED NOR FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT. 2. 12.10.2015 19.10.2015 02.11.2015 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 02.11.2015 ON THE REQUEST OF THE APPELLANT. 3. --- 02.11.2015 28.12.2015 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 28.12.2015 ON THE REQUEST OF THE APPELLANT. 4. --- 28.12.2015 22.02.2016 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 22.02.2016 ON THE REQUEST OF THE APPELLANT. 5. --- 22.02.2016 --- NONE ATTENDED NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS MADE NOR ANY SUBMISSION WAS FURNISHED. 4. HE HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT DECIDING IT ON MERITS. I.T.A. NO.2256/DEL/2016 3 5. HOWEVER, AFTER LOOKING TO THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD APPEARED AND SOUGHT FOR ADJOURNMENT, BUT IT WAS ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING, AS PER THE NOTING OF THE LD. CIT ( A) THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR, AND THEREFORE, HE HAS DI SMISSED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE . LOOKING TO THE FACT THAT IT IS AN EX-PARTE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED ON MERIT, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE ARE REMANDING TH E IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE US TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) TO BE DECIDED AFRESH ON MERITS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING DUE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE . 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH MARCH, 2021 SD/- SD/- [B.R.R. KUMAR] [AMIT SHUKLA] ACCOUNTANTMEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17/03/2021 PKK: