VINAY KUMAR AGRAWAL, RAIPUR (CG) V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAIPUR

ITA 244/BIL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 24424714 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P W ATHLAYE
• Assessee Lawyers: R S KHEMKA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BILASPUR BENCH SMC BILASPUR BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV (J.M) ITA NO. 244/BLPR/2010(A.Y.2005-06) VINAY KUMAR AGARWAL, PROP. OF VINAY & BROS, PO ARANG, DIST. RAIPUR (CG) PAN:AFCPA 1536N (APPELLANT) VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), RAIPUR (CG) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.S.KHEMKA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.W. ATHLAYE DATE OF HEARING : 03/02 /2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10/0 2/2012 ORDER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26/9/2011 OF CIT(A), RAIPUR (CG) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005- 06. THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS FOLLOWS: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY OF RS. 10,000/- U/S. 271(1)(B) BY THE LD. A.O AND ERR ONEOUSLY CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A), RAIPUR IS HIGHLY UNJUSTIFIED, UNWARRANTED A ND ARBITRARY WHICH DESERVES TO BE CANCELLED. 2. THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ME WAS THAT TH E ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW AND EVEN ON MERIT IT IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR LEVYING PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) I FIND THAT ON VARIOUS DATES CASE WAS ADJOURNED AND FINALLY THE MATTER WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23/09/ 2011. THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN ITA NO. 244/BLPR/2011(A.Y.2005-06) 2 APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT ON 23/9/2011. ADJOURNM ENT WAS NOT GRANTED AND CASE WAS DECIDED EX-PARTE ON MERIT. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN EVASIVE TO THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIT(A) WHICH CANNOT BE ENCOURAGED BY BENCH, BUT FACTS REMAIN THAT HE REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT ON 23/9/2011, HOWEVER WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON THE CASE WAS DECIDED ON MERI T. THE FACTS REMAIN THAT DUE OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DECIDING THE CASE, WHICH IS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE I RESTORE THIS MATTER TO AO TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 10 TH DAY OF FEB. 2012. SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER BILASPUR, DATED. 10 TH FEB. 2012 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE CIT CITY CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 5. THE D.R BILASPUR BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, BILASP UR BENCH BILASPUR VM. ITA NO. 244/BLPR/2011(A.Y.2005-06) 3 DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 3/2/2012 SR.PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 6/2/2012 SR.PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER