Smt. Ramanandi Anangpuria Charitable Trust, Faridabad V. ACIT, Faridabad

ITA 2281/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 228120114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 03-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MENAKSHI VOHRA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-2281/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SMT. RAMANANDI ANANGPURIA VS. ACIT, CHARITABLE TRUST, CIRCLE-1, H. NO. 131, SECTOR 15, FARIDABAD. FARIDABAD. PAN: AABTRO448N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY:-SH. ANIL SHARMA, ADV. REVENUE BY:-MS. MENAKSHI VOHRA, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 9.3.2012 OF CIT (A), FARIDABAD, PERTAINING TO 2008-09 ASSESS MENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS AGITATING AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) WHO HAS SUSTAINED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. HOWEVER THE PARTIES WERE HEARD ONLY QUA GROUND NO. 1 WHICH READS AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DECIDING THE APPEALS EX PARTE IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND WITHOUT GRANTING TO THE ASSESSEE A FAIR, PROPER AND MEANINGFUL ITA NO. 2281/DEL/2012 2 OPPORTUNITY. THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS AND SINCERE TO PURSUE THE APPEAL IS WHOLLY INCORRECT AND IS DISREGARD OF THE FACT THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAU SE, FOR ALLEGED NON- COMPLIANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS QUA THE SAME ARE FOUND DISCUS SED IN PARA 5 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH READ AS UNDER: 5. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE NOT ICES FOR HEARING WERE ISSUED ON 04.11.2011 AND 12.12.2011. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE DATED 12.12.2011, SHRI RAVINDER GOEL, THE LD. AR OF THE A PPELLANT SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON 21.12.2011, WHICH WAS ACCORDINGLY AL LOWED FOR HEARING ON 23.01.2012. THE LD. AR OF THE APPELLANT SOUGHT F URTHER ADJOURNMENT VIDE LETTER DATED 23.01.2012. SUBSEQUENTLY, A NOTIC E DATED 30.01.2012 WAS ISSUED AS FINAL OPPORTUNITY REQUIRING HEARING ON 27.02.2012 BUT THE LD. AR SOUGHT FURTHER ADJOURNMENT. IT IS THUS, EVIDENT THAT OVER A PERIOD OF ABOUT FIVE MONTHS, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO FILE ANY SUBMISSIONS IN FURTHER OF ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL. IT IS THEREFOR E, INFERRED THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTEREST IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. T HE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUIN G IT. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT (223 ITR 480) (M.P. ), WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION O F THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT B OUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. SINCE, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT RESPONDED T O THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THIS OFFICE, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE THE LD. CIT (A) A LSO CONSIDERED THE ADDITIONS MADE ON MERIT ALSO. THE LD. AR POINTING T O THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS NOT G RANTED AS ON ADJOURNMENT BEING SOUGHT THE LD. CIT (A) CONCLUDED, THAT THE AS SESSEE DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE INTEREST IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IN THE SAID BACKGROUND IT WAS THE REQUEST OF THE LD. A.R THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTOR ED FOR AFFORDING A HEARING. THE LD. AR GAVE AN UNDERTAKING THAT THE ASSESSEE WO ULD FULLY PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE A.O AS DUE TO LACK OF PR OPER ADVICE FULL ITA NO. 2281/DEL/2012 3 PARTICULARS COULD NOT BE PLACED BEFORE THE AO AND I F THE ISSUE IS RESORTED TO THE CIT(A) REMAND REPORT WILL HAVE TO BE SOUGHT AND AGAIN THE ASSESSEE WHO IS A CHARITABLE TRUST REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF TH E IT ACT, 1961 BY REGISTRATION NO. 6/13 DATED 28.4.2006 WITH CIT (A) FARIDABAD WOULD NEED TO COME TO THE TRIBUNAL. CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF T HE LD. AR AND AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR. DR WHO HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE ISSUE BEING RESTORED AS FOR DECIDING THE ISSUES FRESH EVIDENCES WILL NEED TO BE FILED WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE PA RTIES TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO DE CIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND PROVIDING THE ASSESSEE LIBERTY, TO FILE FRESH EVIDENCES. THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS SUCH IS SET ASIDE. THE OPPORTUNI TY SO GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE INTERESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IT IS HOPED IS UTILISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN PROPER LETTER AND SPIRIT AND IS NOT FRI TTERED AWAY. THE COURTS TAKE A VERY SERIOUS VIEW OF THE ABUSE OF THE PROCESS OF LAW AND THE ASSESSEE ACCORDINGLY IS DECIDED TO SHOW FULL COMPLIANCE AND ENSURE PARTICIPATION BEFORE THE A.O. 4. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF. ITA NO. 2281/DEL/2012 4 5. AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6/12/2013. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (DIVA SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 6/12/2013 *AK VERMA/R. NAHEED* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR