Srinivasa Rao L, Bangalore V. ITO, Bangalore

ITA 3/BANG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 321114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ETWA MUNDA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE SHRI BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3(BANG)/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) SHRI SRINIVASA RAO L, C/O. SHRI CHANDRASHEKAR T NO.13, YASHASWI, 2 ND MAIN ROAD, ITTAMADU LAYOUT, BANASHANKARI 3 RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560085. PAN: AEMPR5968J VS. APPELLANT INCOME-TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), WARD-1(3) BANGALORE. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI PRAKASH HEGDE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ETWA MUNDA. DATE OF HEARING: 28-12-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28-12-2011 O R D E R PER N . BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VP : THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE-SHRI S RINIVASA RAO, L FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 29-9-2010 OF THE CIT(A)-IV, BANGALORE . 2.THE MAIN ISSUE BROUGHT BEFORE US FOR ADJUDICATIO N IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF TH E AO IN PASSING ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ITA 3(BANG)/2011 PAGE 2 OF 3 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT'] AND ALSO THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ME RITS OF THE CASE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CONSIDERED T HE FACTS AND MATERIALS ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION VIZ., 2006-07, THE AO HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144 ON 15-12-2008, PERHAPS IT WAS A TIME-BARRING ASSESSMENT WHICH WAS TO BE COMPLETED B EFORE 31 ST DECEMBER 2008. WE ALSO FIND FROM THE ASSESSMENT OR DER THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR AT ALL BEFORE THE AO IN THESE PROCEEDINGS. HENCE, HE PROCEEDED TO ASSESS THE INCO ME AT ` .24,29,630/- AND LEVIED TAX AND INTEREST AMOUNTING TO ` .1,57,750/-. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE MOVED THE MAT TER BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BELATEDLY. HOW EVER, THE CIT(A) DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS NOT GONE INTO THE MER ITS OF THE CASE ALSO. EVEN SEC.144(1) MANDATES THAT THE AO SH ALL, AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, MAKE THE ASSESSMENT OF THE TOTAL INCOME OR LOSS TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGMENT. ON GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, W E FIND THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE A O IT ENDED IN LACK OF EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. THUS, TH ERE IS FAILURE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO RESTORE THIS MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEN DEC IDE THE APPEAL ACCORDING TO LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO HERE BY DIRECTED ITA 3(BANG)/2011 PAGE 3 OF 3 TO APPEAR BEFORE THE AO AND CO-OPERATE WITH HIM WIT HOUT SEEKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE END OF TH E HEARING ON 28 TH DECEMBER, 2011 SD/- SD/- (SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.BHARATHVAJA SANKAR) VICE-PRESIDENT PLACE : BANGALORE DATED: 28 TH DECEMBER,2011. EKS COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE