M/s. Amar Medical Stores, Surat V. The ACIT.,CPC, Bangalore

ITA 2511/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 72913 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DK MISHR A
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL SHAH

Judgement Text

, , , , SMC, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, SMC BENCH . .. . . .. . , ! ! ! ! BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT ITA NO.2511/AHD/2012 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2011-2012] M/S. AMAR MEDICAL STORES GROUND FLOOR, BHAVANI COMPLEX KAMREJ CHAR RASTA, KAMREJ, SURAT 394 185. PAN : AAHFA 4085 A /VS. ACIT, CPC [JURISDICTIONAL AO ITO WARD-5(1), SURAT. ( (( (#$ #$ #$ #$ / APPELLANT) ( (( (%&#$ %&#$ %&#$ %&#$ / RESPONDENT) '() * + !/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MEHUL SHAH -. * + !/ REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K. MISHRA, SR.DR ./ * )01/ DATE OF HEARING : 17 TH DECEMBER, 2013 234 * )01/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-02-2014 !5 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-I, SURAT D ATED 25.9.2012. 2. THE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN PASS ING EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD. ITA NO.2511/AHD/2012 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT ONLY ONE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, AND DUE TO A DVERSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT INTIMATE ITS CHARTERED ACCOU NTANT TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT I N THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANC E TO THE ASSESSEE TO PLEAD ITS CASE. THE LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDER S OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I FIND THA T IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT SHALL BE IN THE INTER EST OF JUSTICE TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A), AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS RESTORED TO HIS FILE WITH DIRECTION TO PASS A DE NOVO APPELLATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ON MERITS AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSE E IS DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE REVENUE AUTHORITY IN THE MATTER OF DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND TO PROCURE THE NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) WITHIN A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS FRO M THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. I DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. SINCE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAS BEEN RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR DE NOVO APPELLATE ORDER, I AM NOT ADJUDICATING OTHER GROUN DS OF THE APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT