Sri Madupalli Krishna Kishore, Eluru V. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry

ITA 284/VIZ/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0670 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 03-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G S S GOPINATH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.284/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 MADUPALLI KRISHNA KISHORE ELURU CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.ACEPM0229K APPELLANT BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI, CA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI G.S.S. GOPINATH, DR ORDER PER SHRI S.K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT U/S 263 OF THE I.T. ACT. BESIDES POINTING OUT VARIOUS DEFECTS IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN AFFORDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD BY THE CIT WHILE PASSING AN ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT. IN SUPP ORT OF HIS CONTENTION, HE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE CIT W ITH THE SUBMISSIONS THAT CIT ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 8.4.2010 AND I N RESPONSE THERETO THE ASSESSEE APPEARED ON 19.4.2010 AND SOUGHT ADJOURNME NT WITH THE REQUEST TO FIX THE DATE OF HEARING AFTER 31 ST MAY, 2010. THE REQUEST WAS NOT ACCEDED TO AND THE CIT FIXED THE HEARING ON 28.4.2010 AS FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEES. SINCE SUFFICIENT TIME WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE HE COULD NOT FILE THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND PROSECUTE HIS CASE P ROPERLY BEFORE THE CIT. THE CIT ACCORDINGLY PASSED AN ORDER U/S 263 ON 28.4 .2010. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE S UFFICIENT TIME WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE CIT BEFORE PASSING AN ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE CIT TO PASS A FR ESH ORDER U/S 263 OF THE I.T. ACT AFTER AFFORDING A PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. THE LD. D.R. FORMALLY OPPOSED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEES. 2 2. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF CIT, WE F IND THAT CIT HAS PASSED AN ORDER U/S 263 WITHIN 20 DAYS WITHOUT AFFO RDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. WHEN THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON THE FIRST DATE OF HEARING, THE CIT SHOULD HAVE G IVEN A SUFFICIENT TIME TO THE ASSESSEE TO BRING THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND ALSO TO OBTAIN A PROFESSIONAL ADVICE FROM HIS CONSULTANTS. BUT WE FIND THAT CIT HAS PASSED AN ORDER IN HASTE WITHOUT AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEES. WE THEREFORE, SET ASIDE HIS ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS F ILE WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A FRESH ORDER U/S 263 OF THE ACT AFTER AFFORDING PROP ER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.6.2010 SD/- SD/- (BR BASKARAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 23 RD JUNE, 2010 COPY TO 1 SRI MADUPALLI KRISHNA KISHORE, D.NO.7D-1-54, EAST ERN STREET, ELURU-534001 2 THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY 3 THE CIT(A), RAJAHMUNDRY 4 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM