BL HYBRID SEEDS P LTD., Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 239/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 23923114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DR DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: G G MUNDRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Bad and doubtful debts

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 239/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S. B.L. HYBRID SEEDS (P) LTD. S-231, MAHAVIR NAGAR, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 6 (3) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AACCB 4843 K VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.G. MUNDRA, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT -DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 12/10/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/10/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), JODHPUR (CAMP AT JAIPUR) DATED 07-02-2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG, UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN LA W IN PASSING IMPUGNED ORDER ON EX-PARTE BASIS. 2. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GROUND NO. (1) ABO VE ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG, UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN LAW IN:- ITA NO. 239/JP/2013 M/S. B.L. HYBRID SEEDS (P) LTD. VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (3 ), JAIPUR . 2 (A) CONFIRMING ADDITION U/S 68 OF RS. 1.00 LAC TO THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXP LAINED CASH CREDIT OF RS. 1.00 LAC FROM DIRECTOR (B) CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF BAD DEBTS OF RS. 2,34,742/- WRITTEN OFF BY CASH CREDIT OF RS. 1.00 L AC FROM DIRECTOR SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 32,013/- BEING 25% OF SALARY PAID BY THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED LACK OF DETAILS THEREOF. 2.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT IMPUGNED EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE LD. C IT(A) IS UNJUSTIFIED AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTICE FOR HEARING OF APPEAL AND SO IT COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSE E FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR AND IT HAS NO INFORMATION T HAT AS TO WHEN APPEAL WAS TRANSFERRED TO LD. CIT(A), JODHPUR. THE COMPAN Y COULD NOT SUCCESSFULLY RUN THE BUSINESS AND BECAUSE OF NON-RE COVERY OF DUES FROM SUNDRY DEBTORS TO WHOM SALES WERE MADE AND THEREFOR E, THE COMPANY CLOSED ITS BUSINESS IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR AND APPLIED TO ROC FOR STRIKE OFF NAME OF COMPANY U/S 560 OF COMPANIES ACT WHICH WAS DONE BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES VIDE ORDER DATED 19-09-2010 AND THEREAFTER IT VACATED THE OFFICE FROM WHERE IT WORKED. AS BUSINES S WAS CLOSED, THE ASSESSEE LOST TOUCH FROM HIS C.A./ A.R.. THE LD. CI T(A) IN APPEAL ORDER ITA NO. 239/JP/2013 M/S. B.L. HYBRID SEEDS (P) LTD. VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (3 ), JAIPUR . 3 STATED THAT NOTICE TO ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS NOT SERV ED AND IT WAS SENT TO THE CA/AR OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS STATED TO HAVE RECEIVED BY A/R. HOWEVER, THE A/R WAS NOT IN TOUCH WITH THE ASSESS EE AND HE NEITHER INFORMED THE RECEIPT OF NOTICE TO ASSESSEE COMPANY NOR APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THUS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BECAUSE O F CLOSURE OF BUSINESS AND OFFICE COULD NOT RECEIVE NOTICE AND HIS C.A./ A R WHO APPEARS TO HAVE RECEIVED NOTICE NEITHER INFORMED ASSESSEE NOR ATTENDED THE HEARING. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CA USE IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK THE APPEAL TO THE LD . CIT(A) FOR FRESH HEARING. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE CAN PUT UP HIS CAS E BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ASSURES THAT IT WILL KEEP WATCH ON APPEAL AND WILL FULLY COOPERATE DURING HEARING OF APPEAL. IT IS ALSO PLEA DED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN A CHANCE TO D EFEND ITS APPEAL BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. 2.2 THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A ). 2.3 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NO KNOW LEDGE ABOUT THE TRANSFER OF APPEAL TO LD. CIT(A), JODHPUR AND NO NO TICE OF HEARING WAS ITA NO. 239/JP/2013 M/S. B.L. HYBRID SEEDS (P) LTD. VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (3 ), JAIPUR . 4 SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, IN INTEREST OF J USTICE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER PROVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 /10/20 15. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 12/10/ 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. B.L. HYBRID SEEDS (P) LTD., J AIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- 6 (3), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 239/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR