Perennial Designs International P.Ltd, Bengaluru V. ITO,Ward-19(4), New Delhi

ITA 2285/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6550 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE MRS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2285/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013 -14 M/S. PERENNIAL DESIGNS INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., NO.13, SRI CRN CHAMBERS, KASTURBA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-19(4), NEW DELHI. PAN :AAFCP 2162C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 02.01.2018 OF CIT(A)-NEW DELHI PERT AINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS INCLUDING LACK OF OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT WA S DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE/A PPELLANT ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR. DR 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT AS A RE SULT OF ADDITION MADE IN THE QUANTUM, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) WERE INI TIATED. THE EXPLANATION IN THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WA S NOT ACCEPTED LEADING TO THE FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE AP PEARS TO HAVE RELIED UPON SOME APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 03.02.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06.02.2020 02.L05005 20 ITA NO.2285/DEL/2018 PERENNIAL DESIGNS INTERNATIONAL P. LTD. VS. ITO PAGE 2 OF 3 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS CHALLENGING THE ORDER PASSED ON LEGAL GROUNDS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) CONSIDERI NG THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY ORDER LEAD ING TO THE FILING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. ON A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS SEEN T HAT NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ON GOING THROUGH THE GROUND S RAISED, IT APPEARS THAT SOME WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND ORAL SUBMISSIONS APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THERE IS NO DISCUSSION THEREON THE ASSESSEES RIGHT TO BE HEARD WHICH ADMITTEDLY DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN WAIVED HAS BEEN COMPROMISED. ACCORDINGLY IN THE INTERESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE , THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REA SONABLE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTEREST, I S ADVISED TO PARTICIPATE FULLY AND FAIRLY IN THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE CIT(A). IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT FAILING WHICH THE LD. COMMISSIONER APPEALS WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PAS S AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE T IME OF HEARING ITSELF ON 06 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER PK/PS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT