Shri Jagdishbhai Kantibhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-10(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 2872/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 287220514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH CHHUJED
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Notional interest

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD , . .!'#$, % & BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2872/AHD/2011 ( ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ) SHRI JAGDISHBHAI KANTIBHAI PATEL 2, NANDANVAN MOTILLA PARK NEAR ISHWAR BHAWAN AHMEDABAD ( ( ( ( / VS. ITO WARD-10(2) AHMEDABAD * % ./+, ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ACTPP 8281 B ( *- / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) *- 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI MAHESH CHHUJED ./*- 1 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAMIR TEKRIWAL, SR.D.R. (2 1 3% / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 10/05/2012 4') 1 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/05/2012 5 / O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE WH ICH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-XVI , AHMEDABAD DATED 05/09/2011 PASSED FOR A.Y. 2008-09. AT THE OUTSET, WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS DISMISSE D THE APPEAL DUE TO NON-APPEARANCE BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAD RAISED EIGHT GROUNDS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) WHICH ACCORDING TO HIM WAS NOT CONTESTED, APPEARED TO BE NO GRIEVANCE FROM THE O RDER OF THE ASSESSING ITA NO.2872/AHD /2011 SH.JAGDISHBHAI KANTIBHAI PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - OFFICER SINCE THE APPELLANT HAD NOT TURNED UP BEFOR E HIM. AGAINST THE SAID DISMISSAL OF ASSESSEES APPEAL, NOW THE MATTER IS BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. AS FAR AS THE MER ITS OF THE CASE IS CONCERNED, SEVERAL GROUNDS HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED, SU CH AS, PAYMENT OF ESIC, ADDITI8ON OF NOTIONAL INTEREST, DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST, DISALLOWANCE OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES, ETC. THOSE WER E THE ADDITION WHICH WERE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) AS WELL. FEW OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN BUT REMAINED UNCOMPLIED BE FORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). THE SAID APPEAL WAS, THEREFORE, DISM ISSED. NOW BEFORE US, LD.AR HAS STATED THAT INSUFFICIENT TIME WAS GRA NTED AND THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT GIVEN AND MERELY BY ISSUING ONE NOTICE OF HEARING, THE MATTER WAS DECIDED EX-PARTE . HOWEVER, HE HAS PLEADED THAT IF AN OPPORTUNITY BE GIVEN, THEN THERE SHALL BE NO SUCH D EFAULT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.AR HAS ALSO PLACED RELIANCE O N THE DECISION OF (I) HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PALWAL CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. REPORTED AT (2006) 28 4 ITR 153 (P&H) AND OF (II) GUJARAT THEMIS BIOSYN LTD. 74 ITD 339(A HD.). 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CON SIDERED VIEW THAT THIS ASSESSEE DESERVES AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE LD.CIT(A). NATURAL JUSTICE ALSO DEMANDS TO DECIDE AN ISSUE AFTER GRAN TING A REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE CONCERNED PART IES. IN A REPORTED DECISION OF GUJARAT THEMIS BIOSYN LTD. 74 ITD 339(A HD.), A VIEW WAS TAKEN THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) PRESCRI BES THAT AN APPELLATE ORDER IS TO STATE THE POINTS ARISING IN THE APPEAL, THE DECISION OF THE ITA NO.2872/AHD /2011 SH.JAGDISHBHAI KANTIBHAI PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - AUTHORITY THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION SO THAT THROUGH A SPEAKING ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO PRECISELY KN OW THE POINTS OF ISSUE EITHER DECIDED IN FAVOUR OR AGAINST. FOLLOWING T HE ABOVE PRECEDENCE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO LD.CIT(A) WITH T HE DIRECTION TO DECIDE DE NOVO ON MERITS, NEEDLESS TO SAY AFTER PROVIDING AN ADEQ UATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DI RECT THE ASSESSEE THAT INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE OF HEARING FROM T HE SIDE OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CO MPANY SHOULD WITHIN 30 DAYS ON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CO NTACT THE OFFICE OF LD.CIT(A) AND SUO MOTU ASK FOR A CONVENIENT DATE OF HEARING, SO THAT THIS APPEAL CAN BE DECIDED AT AN EARLY DATE WITHOUT WAST ING FURTHER TIME FOR THE SERVICE OF NOTICE AND OTHER LIKE NATURE PROCEDU RES. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THIS APPEAL MAY BE TREATED AS ALLOWED O NLY FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED BUT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- ( . .!'#$ ) ( ) % ( A.K. GARODIA ) ( M UKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 11 / 05 /2012 63..(, .(../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO.2872/AHD /2011 SH.JAGDISHBHAI KANTIBHAI PATEL VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 4 - 5 1 .7 8 7) 5 1 .7 8 7) 5 1 .7 8 7) 5 1 .7 8 7)/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./*- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 9 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 9() / THE CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD 5. 7 >> >/ // / + + + + ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION..10.5.12 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 10.5.12 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S 11.5.12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 11.5.12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER