SMT.VEENA J KANUNGO, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 20(3)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 2268/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9536 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV K GUBGOTRA
• Assessee Lawyers: JAYESH KANUNGO
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INC OME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HONBLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HONBLE SHRI N. K. PRADHAN, AM ./ I.T.A. NO . 2268/MUM/2018 , ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 ) SMT. VEENA J. KANAUNGO, 203 - A, ARJGIRI APARTMENTS, 13 TH KHETWADI BACK ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 004 / VS. ITO 20(3)(5), 205, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL , MUMBAI - 400 012 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. A ADPK6611N ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SH JAYESH KANUNGO , AR / RESPONDENTBY : SH. RAJEEV K. GUBGOTRA , DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16/04 /201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.06.2019 / O R D E R SANDEEP GOSAIN, J UDICIAL MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CHALLENGING AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 32, MUMBAI DATED 02.02.18 FOR AY 20 14 - 15 . 2 I.T.A. NO. 2268 /MUM/201 8 SMT. VEENA J. KANAUNGO 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, WE NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) HAD PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER AND NOW, ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) . 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS FOR BOTH THE PARTIES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD WELL AS THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. F ROM THE RECORDS , WE NOTICED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAD PASSED AN EX - PARTE ORDER AS NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. CIT(A). ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER, WE ALSO NOTICE D THAT INIT IALLY THE APPEAL WAS FIXED ON SEVERAL DATES , WHEN T HE ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE, THEREAF TER THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED. THE DETAILS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AT PARA NO.5 OF ITS ORDER. WE ALSO NOTICED THAT ALTHOUGH NOTICES WERE SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FOR APPEARANCE, BUT STILL NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) WHILE RELYING UPON THE SEVERAL JUDGMENTS INCLUDING THAT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF DR. P. NALLA THAMPY VRS. SHANKAR (1984) SCC 63 3 I.T.A. NO. 2268 /MUM/201 8 SMT. VEENA J. KANAUNGO AND NEW INDIA ASSURANCE VRS. SRINIVASAN (2000) 3 SCC 242 HAD DECIDED THE APPEAL EX - PART E. 4. IN OUR VIEW, I T WAS THE BOUNDED DUTY OF THE PARTIES I.E ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT TO APPEAR BEFORE T HE LD. CIT(A). SINCE, THIS WAS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THEREFORE IT WAS ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT FOR THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT( A). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ACTED WITH DUE DILIGENCE. NEVERTHELESS, THE PRINCIPLES OF NA TURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT THE LI S BETWEEN THE PARTIES SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERIT S AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5 . BE THAT AS IT MAY, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND WHILE CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A) BECAUSE OF UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET ONLY WHEN WE SET ASIDE THE EX - PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND RESTORE BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE O F THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING IT AFRESH ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE 4 I.T.A. NO. 2268 /MUM/201 8 SMT. VEENA J. KANAUNGO SUBJECT TO COST O F RS. 5,000/ - TO BE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ACCOUNT OF PRIME MINISTERS RELIEF FUND WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. 6 . BEFORE PARTING, WE MAY MAKE IT CLEAR THAT OUR DECISION TO RESTORE T HE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) SHALL IN NO WAY BE CONSTRUED AS HAVING ANY REFLECTION OR EXPRESSION ON THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE, WHIC H SHALL BE ADJUDICATED BY LD. CIT(A) INDEPENDENTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE GROUND S OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7 . IN THE NET RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN TERMS INDICATED ABOVE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH JUNE , 2019. SD/ - SD/ - (N. K. PRADHAN ) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 28 . 06 .201 9 SR.PS . DHANANJAY 5 I.T.A. NO. 2268 /MUM/201 8 SMT. VEENA J. KANAUNGO / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT - CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F I LE / BY ORDER, . / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI