BAB Leather Products International , CHENNAI V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 4(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2360/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5980 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI . , , ! ' BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER STAY PETITION NO. 280 /MDS/201 7 (IN ITA NO. 2360 /MDS/20 17) & ITA NO.2360/MDS/2017 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 M/S.BAB LEATHER PRODUCTS- INTERNATIONAL, NO.162 & 163, SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THIRUMUDIVAKKAM, CHENNAI. [PAN: AAAFB 6228 M] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-4(2), CHENNAI. ( % /APPELLANT) ( &'% /RESPONDENT) % ( / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.SRIDHAR, ADV. &'% ( /RESPONDENT BY : MR.ARV. SREENIVASAN, JCIT ( /DATE OF HEARING : 20.10.2017 ( /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.10.2017 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS A STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN I TA NO.2360/MDS/2017 FOR THE AY 2014-15 AND ITA NO.236 0/MDS/2017 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI, IN ITA NO.178/CIT( A)-5/2016-17 DATED 22.08.2017 FOR THE AY 2014-15. SP NO.280/MDS/2017 (IN ITA NO.2360/MDS/2017) & ITA NO.2360/MDS/2017 :- 2 -: 2. MR.ARV. SREENIVASAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT AND MR.S.SRIDHAR, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E APPELLANT. 3. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED THE STAY PETITION AGAINST THE DEMAND OF RS.14,59,948/- AGAIN ST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY PAID NEARLY RS.12,06,652/- AND THE AMOU NT OUTSTANDING WAS RS.3,54,010/-. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE LD.CIT (A) HAD DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL EX PARTE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO OBJECTION, IF THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORE D TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADE QUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD.CIT DATED 19.05.2017 AND IN RESPECT OF THE NOTICE DATED 13.06.2017 POSTING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 13.07.2017, THE LD.CIT WAS ON LEAVE ON THE SAID DATE WHEN THE ASSES SEES COUNSEL HAD APPEARED. IT WAS A FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT IN RESP ECT OF THE NOTICE DATED 25.07.2017 POSTING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 08.08. 2017, THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL HAD APPEARED AND HAD FILED AN ADJOURNMENT L ETTER. HOWEVER, THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE LD.CIT(A). 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE LD.CIT(A). SP NO.280/MDS/2017 (IN ITA NO.2360/MDS/2017) & ITA NO.2360/MDS/2017 :- 3 -: 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PER USAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF EX PARTE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THE REAS ONS FOR NON- APPEARANCE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL MUST BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND WE DO SO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE A SSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON OCTOBER 20, 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( ABRAHAM P GEORGE ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 0 /DATED: OCTOBER 20, 2017. TLN ( &23 43 /COPY TO: 1. % /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. &'% /RESPONDENT 5. 3 & /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF