Sh. Harinder Singh Jahangir, Advocate, Sangrur V. ITO, Sangrur

ITA 291/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9977 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTALDR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK GOELCA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 291/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI HARINDER SINGH JAHANGIR, VS THE ITO, (ADVOCATE) DISTRICT COURTS, WARD 1, SANGRUR, WARD-21, SANGRUR. HOUSING BOARD COLONY, NABHA GATE, SANGRUR. PAN: ADXPJ5710C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHOK GOEL,CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL,DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.05.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), MEERUT CAMP AT PATIA LA DATED 19.01.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER NOTED THAT VARIOUS NOTICES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESS EE FOR FINALIZATION OF THE APPEAL BUT EXCEPT ON TWO DA TES, NEITHER ASSESSEE NOR HIS COUNSEL HAS APPEARED BEFOR E HIM IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE. EVEN ON TWO OCCASIO NS, WHEN COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE HAS APPEARED, HE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. ULTIMATELY, NONE APPEARED BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THEREFORE, LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THA T 2 ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL A ND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED. 3. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, I AM OF THE VIE W THE MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL O F THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDING TO SECTION 250(6) OF T HE ACT, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS REQUIRED TO PASS REASONED O RDER WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS CASE, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTEND THE APPELL ATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND ON TWO OCCASIONS, ONLY SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS, EVEN THEN THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS REQUIRED TO PASS REASONED ORDER WHI CH IN THIS CASE HAS NOT BEEN DONE. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), WITHOUT PASSING ANY REASONED ORDER, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. EQUALLY THE ASSESSEE IS MO ST NEGLIGENT IN NOT ATTENDING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING S BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS). HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(APPE ALS), AS NOTED ABOVE, SHALL HAVE TO MENTION POINT FOR DETERMINATION AND REASONS FOR DECISION IN THE APPEL LATE ORDER. 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, I SET ASIDE TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECID E THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW GIVING POINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND REASONS FOR DEC ISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER EVEN IF ASSESSEE MAY NOT COOPERATE WITH HIM. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHALL GIV E REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE 3 ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED NOT TO SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE APPEAL. IN CASE ASSESSEE WILL SEEK ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER, LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHALL B E FREE TO DRAW ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18 TH MAY, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD