M/s. Purvi Vipul Agrawal, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-12(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 280/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 28020514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AJIT P SANDESARA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , .. , '# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.280/AHD/2012 ( & ' & ' & ' & ' / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) PURVI VIPUL AGRAWAL B-208, WALL STREET 2 NEAR GUJARAT COLLEGE ELLISBRIDGE AHMEDABAD 380 006 & & & & / VS. THE ITO WARD-12(3) AHMEDABAD ( '# ./)* ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ( (+ / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ,-(+/ RESPONDENT ) (+ . '/ APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJIT P.SANDESARA ,-(+ / . ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD TANWANI, SR.D.R. &0 / #/ // / DATE OF HEARING : 28/03/2012 12' / # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30/03/12 '3/ O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE W HICH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD DATED 30/12/2011. THE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND WHICH IS ARGUED BEFORE US IS GROUND NO.1; REPRODUCED BELOW:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND AS PER LAW, LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT PROVIDIN G SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT BEFORE DECIDING THE AP PEAL EX-PARTE AND SUSTAINING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO .280/AHD/2012 PURVI VIPUL AGRAWAL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WEL L AS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN MADE U/S.144 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 DATED 30/11/2010. EVEN BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY REPRESENTED. FROM THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT, TODAY BEFORE US, LD.AR MR.AJIT P.SANDES ARA APPEARED. HE HAS INFORMED THAT THE TIME GRANTED BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER WAS INSUFFICIENT, HENCE PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE TO ATTEND THE A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. LIKEWISE, HE HAS INFORMED THAT THE LE ARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS FIXED THE DATE OF HEARING AT THE FAG END OF MON TH SEPTEMBER. HOWEVER, THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WAS BUSY IN FINAL IZATION OF AUDIT WORK AND, THEREFORE, PLEADED FOR AN ADJOURNMENT BUT THE SAME WAS TURNED DOWN AND THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX-PARTE . LD.AR MR.AJIT P.SANDESARA HAS MADE A STATEMENT AT BAR THAT IF AN OPPORTUNITY BE GRANTED TO REPRESENT THE CASE, THEN HE SHALL PERSONALLY APPEAR BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER ALONG WITH EVIDENCES AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND GET T HE ASSESSMENT FINALIZED AT AN EARLY DATE. HE HAS ALSO GIVEN AN U NDERTAKING IN THIS REGARD IN WRITING ON HIS LETTER OF AUTHORITY. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE, LD.SR.DR MR.VINOD TANWANI HAS ARGUED THAT THE APPELLANT DOES NOT DESERVE ANY SYMPATHY BECAUSE OF DELIBERATE NON-APPEARANCE IN TH E PAST. 4. HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE D IFFICULTY OF THE LADY- ITA NO .280/AHD/2012 PURVI VIPUL AGRAWAL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE CONSCIENTIOUS VIEW THAT NA TURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER TO BE DECIDED DE NOVO AS PER LAW. WE HEREBY DIRECT THE ASSESSEE AND HER LD.REPRESENTATIVE TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICES OF HEA RING PROMPTLY WITHOUT ASKING FOR FRIVOLOUS ADJOURNMENT. CONSIDERING THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE, WE DEEM IT JUSTIFIABLE TO AL LOW THIS APPELLANT TO REPRESENT THE CASE AFRESH BY PRODUCING REQUISITE IN FORMATION AND EVIDENCES, SO THAT A CORRECT ASSESSMENT BE MADE. W E HOLD ACCORDINGLY. GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE TREATED AS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED BUT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( ) '# ( T.R. MEENA ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 30/ 03 /2012 ..&, .&../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4' '3 / ,4 5'4'/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-(+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-XX, AHMEDABAD 5. 49: ,& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :; <0 / GUARD FILE. '3& '3& '3& '3& / BY ORDER, -4 , //TRUE COPY// = == =/ // / ) ) ) ) ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD