M/s. Moj Exports Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2521/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3792 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IN FAVOUR OF ANY OFFI CE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2521/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 MOJ EXPORTS PVT. LTD. A-3/63, JK APARTMENTS, PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI PAN : AAECM2220K VS. ITO WARD-17(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, J.M. : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 10 TH FEBRUARY, 2017 OF CIT (A)-38 DELHI PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEAR. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . A PERSON STATING TO BE AN OFFICE EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNSEL WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUESTED FOR TIME. IT IS NOTICED THAT NO POWER OF ATTORNEY HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FAVOUR OF THE ANY COUNSEL. THE OFFI CE EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNSEL THOUGH SUBMITTED NO IDENTITY PROOF OR ANY OTHER EVI DENCE, HE WAS NEVER-THE- LESS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS THE FACTS IN THESE CIRCUMS TANCES. HOWEVER, HE SAID HE HAD NOTHING FURTHER TO SAY. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY P OWER OF ATTORNEY HAVING BEEN EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS, THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST, ACCORDINGLY, WAS NOT ENTERTAI NED AND THE APPLICATION WAS REJECTED. 2. ACCORDINGLY, AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR.DR, IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT ON MERITS. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE IMP UGNED ORDER IS ALSO AN EX APPELLANT BY - RESPONDENT BY SH. T. VASANTHAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 25-08-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0500500500 31.10.2017 2 ITA NO.2521 /DEL/2017 PARTE ORDER WHERE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UN-REPRESENTED. THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CHALLENGED IN APPEAL WAS SUST AINED BY THE CIT(A) IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER : I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND CONSIDERED THE REASONING PUT FORWARD BY ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED, RATHER REFUSED TO PROSECUTE THIS APPEAL INSPITE OF SEVERAL OPPORTUNIT IES GRANTED TO IT TO REPRESENT ITS CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HENCE , THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 3. I FIND THAT THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN IN THE AFORES AID FINDING DO NOT MEET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AS SET OUT IN SUB SECTION (6 ) OF SECTION 250 OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHILE DECIDI NG THE APPEALS FILED IS REQUIRED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL NOT ONLY BY WRITI NG BUT ALSO IS MANDATORILY REQUIRED TO STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. IT IS SEEN THAT THE SAID REQUIREMENT IS NOT FULFIL LED. ACCORDINGLY, TO MAKE GOOD THE STATUTORY DEFICIT, T HE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTI ON TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IT IS HOPED THAT THE OPPORTUNITY SO PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE IS UTILIZED IN GOOD FAITH BY MAKING FULL AND PROPER COMPLIANCES AS IN THE EVENTUALITY OF THE ABUSE OF THE SAME, THE CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY T O PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ORDER WAS PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST OCTOBER,2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER SH(DEL)/POONAM(CHD) COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI