ITA NO. 2910/ DEL/ 2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. N O. 2910/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2006 - 07 M/S HINDUSTAN INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES LTD., 6/7, DB GUPTA ROAD, PAHAR GANJ, NEW DELHI (PAN: VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(4), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. ROBIN RAWAT, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 20 - 1 - 201 5 DATE OF ORDER : 2 3 - 1 - 201 5 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : J M TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - XV , NEW DELHI DATED 04 . 4 .201 2 P ERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 2. IN THIS CASE , NO TICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST, IN SPITE OF THE SAME, ASSESSEE , NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE, NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL ITA NO. 2910/ DEL/ 2012 2 PURPOSE WOULD BE SERV ED TO ISSUE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, WE ARE DECIDING THE PRESENT APPEAL EXPARTE QUA ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. DR STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUND NO. 1 I N WHICH HE HAS STATED THAT AO HAS LEVIED THE PENALTY IN DISPUTE WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HE REQUESTED THAT THIS GROUND MAY BE CONSIDERED AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE, ACCORDING TO LAW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD T HE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORDS ; THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AS REQUESTED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE GROUND NO. 1 FOR PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, AS RAISED IN GROUND NO. 1 IS REPRODUCED BELOW: - THAT THE LD. ITO HAS ERRED IN IMPOSING PENALTY OF RS. 3,88,857/ - U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. THE LD. ITO WAS ON LEAVE ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING OF THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ON 8.6.2009. HENCE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE HAVE BEEN VIOLATED. 5. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO. 1, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ITA NO. 2910/ DEL/ 2012 3 ASSESSEE IS ENTI TLED FOR OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER THE LAW, AFTER PROVIDING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE O PEN C OURT ON 2 3 / 1 /20 1 5 . S D / - S D / - [ S.V. MEHROTRA ] [ H.S. SIDHU ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 2 3 / 1 /201 5 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 2910/ DEL/ 2012 4 DATE OF DICTATION . DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS .. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER SENT TO MEMBER FOR SIGNATURE DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK AFTER PRONOUNCEMENT TO THE SR. PS/PS . DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..