Sh. Pankaj Dhiman, Jammu ( J&k) V. The Income Tax Officer, Jammu

ITA 226/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0529 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S KANWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.226(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN: AJAPD1470G SH. PANKAJ DHIMAN, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMMU. WARD 1(2), JAMMU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH.P.N.ARORA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SH. S.S. KANWAL, DR DATE OF HEARING: 12/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18/07/2016 ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, JM: THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10 AGAINST THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 30.04.2013, PAS SED BY THE LD. CIT(A), REFUSING TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 4 MONTHS AND 24 DA YS INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FILING HIS APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED T HAT NO NOTICE REGARDING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WAS EVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS, THEREFORE, THAT THE ASS ESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A). ITA NO.226(ASR)/2016 A.Y. 2009-10 2 3. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ORDER UNDER APPEAL TALKS OF A NOTICE DATED 22.03.2013 HAVING BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR 16.04.2013, ON WHICH DATE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION, WERE FILED. AGAIN, ON 17.06 .2013, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS DEFECTIVE FOR NOT BEING IN TIME. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SAME, LATEST BY 29.04.2013, BUT, AGAIN, NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS MANNER, THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN LIMINE. 4. FROM THE ABOVE CONTENTS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, S ERVICE ON THE ASSESSEE OF THE NOTICE ISSUED DOES NOT STAND MET OU T. THAT BEING SO, OBVIOUSLY, ONCE NO NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE ANY REPRES ENTATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE DATES FIXED AND TO KEEP HIS EXPLA NATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). MOREOVER, THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE LD. CIT(A) TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE, WITHOUT GOING INT O THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED AT T HE BAR THAT HE WOULD OFFER PROPER EXPLANATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) ON OPPORTUNITY BEING GRANTED TO HIM. 6. THE LD. DR HAS PLACED STRONG RELIANCE ON THE IM PUGNED ORDER. 7. IN THE ABOVE FACTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED AFRESH, IN ACCORDANCE ITA NO.226(ASR)/2016 A.Y. 2009-10 3 WITH LAW, ON AFFORDING DUE AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL, NO DOUBT, COOPERATE I N THE FRESH PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 8. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APP EAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/07/ 2016. SD/- SD/- (T.S. KAPOOR) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER /SKR/ DATED: 18/07/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: SH. PANKAJ DHIMAN, JAMMU 2. THE ITO WARD 1(2), JAMMU 3. THE CIT(A), JAMMU 4. THE CIT, JAMMU 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.