Rajendra Kumar, Kanpur V. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Kanpur

ITA 293/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7640 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.293/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.293/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR, 87/164, ACHARYA NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAWPK 1143 N VS. A.C.I.T.-II, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-I, KANPUR DATED 02/02/2017 PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE NOTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER AS ACCORDING TO HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON THE DAT ES WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FROM THE ORDER O F CIT(A), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE CIT(A) HAD ISSUED VARIOUS NOTICES TO THE A SSESSEE HOWEVER, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED NOR FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND ULTIMATELY THE CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER. HOWEVER, WE FEEL THAT O NE MORE OPPORTUNITY APPELLANT BY SHRI SWARN SINGH, C.A. RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING 17/01/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 / 01 /201 9 I.T.A. NO.293/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 2 SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE P ROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN THE NATURAL JUSTICE DEMAND S THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WIT HOUT GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. WE ARE OF THE V IEW FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AN D SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH T HE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL A FRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE AS SESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO-OPERATE WITH LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/01/2019) SD/. SD/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:18/01/2019 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW