Shri Lukman Ilyas Khatri, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-5(2), Surat

ITA 2922/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0500 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL KUMAR
• Section: 5(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: SHRI D.K. TYAGI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER SRI LUKMAN ILYAS KHATRI (APPELLANT) PAN NO. ALQPK5956N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2) SURAT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SRI RAHUL KUMAR, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : HARDIK VORA, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 21-02-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-02-2013 / ORDER PER : D.K TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)- I SURAT, DATED 16.10.2012. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF LD.CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT LEV IED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE I.T.A. NO. 2922/AHD/2012 A.Y.:-2009-10 ITA NO. 2922/AHD/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 PAGE NO LUKMAN ILYAS KHATRI VS. ITO 2 ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS COVERED BY THE EAR LIER ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THE COPIES OF WHICH WERE ALSO FILED. HOWEVER A FTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT HE HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER IN WHICH EVEN THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE NOT PROPERL Y MENTIONED. WE FURTHER FIND THAT ONLY ONE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY HIM TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE. SINCE, THE FACTS ARE NOT COMING OUT OF T HE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO DECIDE WHETHER THE CASE L AWS RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE OR NOT, THEREFORE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AND BY PA SSING A SPEAKING ORDER. WE HOLD ACCORDINGLY. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (T.R. MEENA) (D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 28 /02/2013 A.K. / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , ! , '# / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. $% &' / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , ( / ' ) ! , '#