Milky Investment and Trading Company, New Delhi V. ACIT, Circle-16(2), New Delhi

ITA 3029/DEL/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2049 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 19-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANSHUL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 3029/Del/2022 Milky Investment and Trading Company Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3029/DEL/2022 (A.Y 2014-15) Milky Investment and Trading Company, 4 th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi PAN No. AAACM0584A (APPELLANT) Vs ACIT Circle-16(2) C.R. Building, I. P. Estate, New Delhi (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR US, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Income Tax Department/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) dated 30/11/2022 for Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. As per Ground No. 2 of the Appeal, the assessee pleaded that the representative of the assessee could not appear on the date of hearing before the CIT(A) as the said date had been inadvertently Appellant by Sh. M.P. Rastogi, Adv Respondent by Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.05.2024 2 ITA No. 3029/Del/2022 Milky Investment and Trading Company Vs. ACIT skipped by the Authorized Representative as he was busy in compliance with time barring assessments. 4. The Assessee's Representative submitted that the order impugned has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and justified the order of the Lower Authorities. 6. Heard and perused the material. Considering the fact that the assessee has not appeared on 01/11/2022, which was the last date of hearing before the CIT(A), and the Assessee's Representative was claimed to be busy in compliance with the time barring assessments could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order without providing opportunity to the Assessee, with his intention to provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee, we allow Ground No.2 of the Appeal and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication of the Appeal. Nevertheless, the assessee shall be provided with opportunity of being heard. 3 ITA No. 3029/Del/2022 Milky Investment and Trading Company Vs. ACIT 7. In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 30 th Day of May, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. B. R. R. KUMAR) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30/05/2024 R. Naheed * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI