MEKA PAPA RAO, MUMBAI V. ACIT BUSINESS CIRCLE XIII, CHENNAI

ITA 3044/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2365 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS ANURADHA P M
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , B B ENCH, CHENNAI , . , % BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / I.T.A. NO.3044/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 DR. MEKA PAPA RAO, BUILDING NO.3, MADHULL, NO,4M DR.ANNIE BESANT ROAD, MUMBAI-400 018. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE-XIII, CHENNAI-600 034. PAN:AGGPR6208M ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MRS.ANURADHA P.M., ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 11.03.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.03.2019 / O R D E R PER S.JAYARAMAN, AM: THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12, CHENNAI, I N ITA NO.21/CIT(A)-12/2013-14 DATED 31.08.2018 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT WHICH IS DE NIED. THERE WAS A ONE DAY DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL AND THE LD . AR PLEADED THAT IT COULD BE CONDONED ON OPERATIONAL DIFFICULTIES. AFT ER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL AND ADMIT THE SAME FOR HEARING. 2 ITANO.3044/CHNY/2018 3. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS DISMISSE D THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT RE PRESENT HIS CASE PROPERLY BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AND PLEADED THAT AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) MAY BE P ROVIDED, AS THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE ON ACCOUNT OF NON- PROSECUTION. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT NEARLY TEN O PPORTUNITIES WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT C OOPERATED IN GETTING HIS APPEAL DISPOSED OFF. THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL M AY BE DISPOSED OF ON MERITS. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) REVEALS THAT HE HAS POSTED THE APPEAL ON VARIOUS DATES, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL. IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE NEEDS TO BE GRANTED AN EFFECTIVE OPPOR TUNITY TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), SUBJECT TO THE ASSES SEE PAYING A COST OF 2,000/- TO THE PRIME MINISTER NATIONAL RELIEF FUND (IN SHORT PMNRF). CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A). SUBJECT TO THE ASSESSEE PAYING A COS T OF RS.2,000/- TO THE PMNRF AND PRODUCING THE COPY OF THE RECEIPT THEREOF BEFORE THE 3 ITANO.3044/CHNY/2018 LD.CIT(A), THE LD CIT(A) SHALL AFFORD AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEN DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH MARCH, 2019 AT CHENNAI SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . ) (GEORGE MATHAN) (S.JAYARAMAN) ( ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER) ( ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) /CHENNAI, # /DATED 11 TH MARCH, 2019 SOMU '( )( /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. * ( ) /CIT(A) 4. * /CIT 5. ( . /DR 6. 1 /GF