Sh. Daya Kishan Gill, Panchkula V. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula

ITA 272/CHANDI/2022

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sh. Daya Kishan Gill against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula, which was passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contested the ex-parte order dated 14.02.2022, arguing that it was made without proper perusal of the assessment record and exceeded legislative jurisdiction. The appellant's primary grievance was the lack of opportunity to present his case due to his wife's serious medical condition at the time, which he supported with an affidavit. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments, noting the need for a fair hearing and the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127813 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2022
• Other Referred Cases: S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order; Assessment record
• Section: 27; 263

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ, च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 272/CHD/2022 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sh. Daya Kishan Gill, B-91, AWHO, Vikram Vihar, Sector 27 Panchkula Vs. बनाम Pr. CIT, Panchkula थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AGDPG4634P अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate and Shri Ashok Goyal, CA राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt.Kusum, CIT DR स ु नवाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 27.04.2023 उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M.: This is Assessee’s appeal against the order dated 14.02.2022 of the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula [ in short, ‘PCIT’], taking the following grounds of appeal :- 1. That the Ld. CIT has erred in concluding proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without proper perusal of Assessment record. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT has exceeded legislative jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 272-Chd-2022 – Sh. Daya Kishan Gill, Panchkula 2 thus the order passed by the Ld. CIT is bad in the eyes of the law. 3. That the Ld. CIT has erred in substituting an alternative view as against the firm view adopted by the Ld. AO at the time of original assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the Appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 2. At the outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the foremost grievance of the Assessee is that the ld. Pr Commissioner of Income Tax has concluded the proceedings u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), without proper perusal of the assessment record by passing an ex-parte order dated 14.2.2022 u/s 263 of the Act. It has further been submitted that during that period the Assessee was occupied with serious medical issue of his wife which was later on detected as ‘Cancer’. It has further been submitted that the non-appearance of the Assessee before the Ld. PCIT was unintentional and beyond his control. An affidavit to this effect has also placed by the Assessee on record. It is prayed that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the Assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing of the appeal before the ld. Commissioner and the appeal may be directed to be decided on merits. 272-Chd-2022 – Sh. Daya Kishan Gill, Panchkula 3 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 4. Heard. We have gone through the order of the ld. PCIT, and find that the appeal of the Assessee has been dismissed by passing an ex- parte order, merely on the basis of the non-prosecution. We find that the ld. PCIT, Panchkula has dismissed the appeal without considering the material available on record, as also without going into the merits of the case. We find that the Assessee was prevented by sufficient reasons for his non-appearance before the ld. PCIT, as has been explained by him. In support thereof, the Assessee has also furnished an affidavit dated 21.3.2023 on record. As such, an opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the Ld. PCIT. Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit. 5. In view of the above, finding force in the grievance raised by the Assessee, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. PCIT, to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. PCIT. All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 272-Chd-2022 – Sh. Daya Kishan Gill, Panchkula 4 6. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed. Order pronounced on 28.04.2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( A.D. JAIN ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) Vice President Accountant Member Dated : 28.4.2023 “आर.के.” आदेश क त*ल+प अ,े+षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु 1त/ CIT 4. +वभागीय त न5ध, आयकर अपील$य आ5धकरण, च7डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar