RAJESHWAR PRASAD, W.CHAMPARAN V. ITO- WARD, BETTIAH

ITA 226/PAT/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6604 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 133A

Judgement Text

ITA NO.226/PAT/2019 A.Y. 20 01-2002 RAJESHWAR P RASAD, WEST CHAMPARAN 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA E-COURT, KOLKATA [VIRTUAL COURT HEARING] BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT(KZ) I.T.A. NO. 226/PAT/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-2002 RAJESHWAR PRASAD,.................................. ............................APPELLANT C/O. NIRMAL & ASSOCIATES, NEPALI KOTHI, BORING ROAD, PATNA, BIHAR-800001 [PAN: AIRPP3110H] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ...............................RESPONDENT WARD-BETTIAH APPEARANCES BY: N O N E, FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI AJAY KUMAR, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 08, 202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 08, 2021 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), MUZZAFARPUR D ATED 13.06.2019 PASSED EX-PARTE, WHEREBY HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DEALING IN CIGARETTES ON WHOLESALE BASIS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN M/S. SANJAY TR ADERS. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED B Y HIM ON 31.10.2001 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,28,350/-. A SURVEY U NDER SECTION 133A WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 21.03.20 01 AND BASED ON THE ADVERSE FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY AS WELL AS FURTHER E NQUIRY MADE DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.9,02,000/ - AFTER MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES VIDE ORDER DATED 24.03.2004 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.226/PAT/2019 A.Y. 20 01-2002 RAJESHWAR P RASAD, WEST CHAMPARAN 2 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE A SSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO SATISFACTORY CO MPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DIS MISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION AND CONFIRMED ALL THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATE D 13.06.2019. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED IN THIS CASE TODAY, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D.R., HOWEVER, H AS FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THIS MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH. AS POINTED OUT BY HIM FRO M THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), EVEN THOUGH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS RIGHT FROM THE YEA R 2005 TO 2019, THE LAST HEARING WAS FIXED ON 03.06.2019 AND A NOTICE O F THE SAME WAS SENT ONLY ON 24.05.2019 GIVING A VERY SHORT TIME TO THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME. AS FURTHER NOTED FROM THE IMPUGNED O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) EARLIER ON 22.02.2017 AND THEREAFTER T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BY HIM FINALLY ON 03 .06.2019 I.E. AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN TWO YEARS AND THAT TOO GIVING A VERY SHORT TIME TO THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME. IT IS PERTINENT T O NOTE THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR FOR THE HEARING FIXED AFT ER MORE THAN TWO YEARS ON 03.06.2019 APPARENTLY BECAUSE OF THE SHORT NOTIC E, NO FURTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) OF HE ARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OF BY HIM BY RELYING ON THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS STATED TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MORE THAN TWELVE YEARS BACK ON 10.01.2007. MOREOVER, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS REQUIRED TO D ISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF ITA NO.226/PAT/2019 A.Y. 20 01-2002 RAJESHWAR P RASAD, WEST CHAMPARAN 3 THE ASSESSEE VIDE AN ORDER IN WRITING STATING THE P OINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISI ON. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NO T COMPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS. KEEPING IN VIEW ALL THESE RELEVANT FA CTS OF THE CASE, I CONSIDER IT FAIR AND PROPER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) EX-PA RTE AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY PASSING A WELL DISC USSED AND WELL REASONED ORDER AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTE D TO MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND EXTEND ALL THE POSSIBLE COOPERATION IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE LD. CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFRESH EXPEDITIOUSLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SEPTEMBER 08, 2021. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) VICE-PRESI DENT KOLKATA, THE 8 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021 COPIES TO : (1) RAJESHWAR PRASAD, C/O. NIRMAL & ASSOCIATES, NEPALI KOTHI, BORING ROAD, PATNA, BIHAR-800001 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- BETTIAH (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), MUZZAFA RPUR, (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETA RY/DDO INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.