M/s. Maf Plast India Ltd., Vapi V. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi

ITA 2687/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2086 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R KAVITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH K KABRA
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

MAF PLAST INDIA LTD. V. ACIT-VAPI/I.T.A. NO.2687/AHD/2016/A.Y.08-09 PAGE 1 OF 2 INCOM TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT-BENCH-SURAT BEFORE SHRI C .M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O. P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2687/AHD/2016: ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 M/S. MAF PLAST INDIA LTD. PLOT NO. C-7, 57-59 MARIGSAR COMPLEX N.H.N.8 VAPI PAN: AABCM6424G V S . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -VAPI APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI SURESH K. KABRA, CA REVENUE BY MS. R. KAVITHA JCIT, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 0 2 .05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03.05.2018 ORDER PER O. P. MEENA, AM 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - VALSAD (IN SHORT THE CIT (A)) DATED 02.07.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. GROUND NO. 1 TO 3 STATES THAT CIT (A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE RECTIFICATION ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT PASSED WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 6,04,818 ON ACCOUNT OF OUTSTANDING BALANCE AT END OF THE YEAR. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 IS PASSED WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 154(3) OF THE ACT. THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,04,818 IS MADE WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE AND GIVING SHOW CAUSE. WE FIND THAT IT IS PRE-DECISION HEARING STANDARD OF NORM OF RULE OF AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. WE FIND THAT IN THIS INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MAF PLAST INDIA LTD. V. ACIT-VAPI/I.T.A. NO.2687/AHD/2016/A.Y.08-09 PAGE 2 OF 2 GIVEN PROPER HEARING. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND TO REPRESENT HIS CASE. THEREFORE, IN EXERCISE OF POWER CONFERRED UNDER RULE 28 OF TRIBUNAL RULES, WE RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ALLOWING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,04,818 BEING OUTSTANDING BALANCE AT THE YEAR END. NEVERTHELESS, TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL COOPERATE IN THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AND FILE NECESSARY EVIDENCES ON WHICH HE WANTS TO RELY UPON. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.05.2018 SD/- SD/- (C.M. GARG) (O.P. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / SURAT, DATED: 03 MAY 2018. COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SURAT