M/s Revival Impex, Bangalore V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8(1), Bangalore

ITA 2529/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1084 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SIDDAPP A JI R N
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE S HRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T . A. NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 - 12 ) M/S. REVIVAL IMPEX, NO.19/15, 2 ND FLOOR, S K GA RDEN, NEAR ITI LAYOUT, BENSONTOWN POST, BANGALORE. . APPELLANT. VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8(1), BANGALORE. .. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : MS. SOUMYA, ADVOCATE. R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI SIDDAPPAJI R N, ADDL. CIT (D.R) DATE OF H EARING : 11.09.2018. DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 14 .09 .201 8 . O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, A .M . : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , BANGALORE DT. 30.09.2017 FOR ASST. YEAR 2011 - 12 . 2. B RIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER : - 2 IT A NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 2.1 THE ASSESSEE, A FIRM ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURE, TRADING, DISTRIBUTING, IMPORT AND EXPORT OF TEXTILES AND GARMENTS, FILED ITS RETURN FOR A.Y. 201 1 - 12 ON 2 6.09.2011 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.50,26,33 5. THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'), VIDE ORDER DT. 24.01.2014 , WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE S INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.85,20,549 IN VIEW OF DISALLOWANCE OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.34,94,217 UNDER SECTION 40(B)(1) OF THE ACT. 2.2 AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DT. 24.1.2014 FOR A.Y. 201 1 - 12 , THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) - 1 , BANGALORE WHO DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL EX - PARTE, FOR NON - PROSECUTI ON VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT.30.07 .2017. 3. THE ASSESSEE, BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 1 , BANGALORE DT. 30.09.2017 HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN IT HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 3 IT A NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 4. GROUND NO.1 4.1 AT THE OUTSET THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE URGED BEFORE US GROUND NO.1 SUBMITTING THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSING THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL WAS PASSED EX - PARTE FOR NON - PROSECUTION AND THAT THIS FACT IS EVIDENT FROM A PERUSAL OF THE LAS T PARA OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 4 IT A NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 ACCORDING TO THE LD. AR, THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO ATTEND HEARINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NEITHER DELIBERATE NOR INTENTIONAL AND WAS DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE REASONS. IT WAS PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF SUBS TANTIAL JUSTICE, THE EX - PARTE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR CONSIDERATION AND ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE IN THE MATTER. 4.2 PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR FOR REVENUE SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BEFORE US, IT WAS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT. 30.09.2017 WAS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) EX - PARTE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THIS FACT IS EVIDENT FROM A PERUSAL OF LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS THE LD. CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANCES BY MERELY REITERATING AND UPHOL DING THE VIEW OF THE A.O. WITHOUT ADMITTEDLY HAVING THE BENEFIT OF ANY SUBMISSIONS FROM ASSESSEE S SIDE. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WOULD BE SERVED ONLY IF THE T RUE AND CORRECT INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE BE BROUGHT TO TAX. THAT IS NOT SO IN THE CASE ON HAND 5 IT A NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 WHERE THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF EX - PARTE ON GROUNDS OF NON - PROSECUTION. IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ON HAND, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT IS IMPERATIVE IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), DISPOSED OFF , EX - PARTE ON GROUNDS OF NON - PROSECUTION IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE AND WE DO SO. WE, C ONSEQUENTLY , REMAND THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. C IT(A) DE NOVO FOR CONSIDERATION AND ADJUDICATION OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. NEEDLESS TO ADD, THE LD. CIT(A) WILL DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL ON MERITS OF THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE HIM , ONLY AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSESSEE ADEQ UATE OPPORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD AND TO FILE DETAILS / SUBMISSIONS REQUIRED, WHICH SHALL BE DULY CONSIDERED BEFORE DECIDING THE ISSUE BY WAY OF A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. CONSEQUENTLY, GROUND NO. 1 OF THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 5. GROUND NOS.2 TO 6 (ON MERITS) IN VIEW OF OUR FINDINGS RENDERED ON GROUND 1 OF THIS APPEAL (SUPRA), THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR US TO ADJUDICATE THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISE D ON MERITS AT GROUND NOS. 2 TO 6 . 6 IT A NO. 2529 /BANG/20 17 6. GROUND NO. 7 I S GENERAL IN NATURE AND NO ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR THEREON. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 201 1 - 12 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 14TH DAY OF SEPT., 201 8 . SD/ - ( SUNIL KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER S D/ - ( JASON P BOAZ ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DT. 14 .09 .2018 *REDDY GP COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 4 CIT(A) 2 RESPONDENT 5 DR. ITAT, BANGALORE 3 CIT 6 GUARD FILE SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE.