Milan Sureshbhai Parikh Legal Heir of Late Nirmalaben Sureshbhai Parikh, Surat V. Dy, CIT, Circle 2(2), Surat, Surat

ITA 306/SRT/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9273 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH GAMIT
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 306 & 307/SRT/2019 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Court Hearing) Milan Sureshbhai Parikh (Legal Heirs), Nirmalaben Sureshbhai Parikh, 22, Samata Nehrunagar, Nr. Ichchanath Mahadev, Dumas Road, Surat-395007. PAN : AFLPP2103D Vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(2), Surat. APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri Yogesh Gamit, AR Respondent by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR with Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. DR Date of hearing 20/10/2022 Date of pronouncement 31/10/2022 O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned two appeal filed by the assessees, pertaining to Assessment Years (AY) 2013-14 to 2014-15, are directed against the separate orders passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. At the outset, Shri Yogesh Gamit, Authorized Representative (ld. AR) for the assessee submitted that Milan Sureshbhai Parekh Legal Hire of Late Nirmalaben Sureshbhai Parikh, was unaware of the Income Tax case of Late Nirmalaben Sureshbhai Parikh pertaining to captioned year was filed by Nirmalaben Sureshbia Parikh on 12 th April 2016. Subsequently Ld. CIT(Appeals), Surat vide it order dated 29-03-2019, passed an ex parte order as the hearing which remain unattended by Nirmalaben Sureshbhai Parikh due to her demises on 21 st October, 2016 after filing of appeal. Thus, due to death of the assessee, the proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) remain unattended. 2 ITA.306 & 307/SRT/2019/AY.2013-14 & 2014-15 Milan Sureshbhai Parikh 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee took adjournment from time to time , however, assessee could not submit the documents and evidences before the ld. CIT(A), due to death of the assessee, therefore an another opportunity to contest the appeal before the First Appellate Authority may be granted to the assessee. 4. On the other hand, Learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue pleaded that assessee did not attend the proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) and assessee took lot of adjournments during the appellate proceedings, hence assessee is not interested to prosecute the appeals, therefore further innings should not be given to the assessee and therefore both the appeals should be dismissed. 5. We have heard both the parties. We note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A) due to dealth. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 3 ITA.306 & 307/SRT/2019/AY.2013-14 & 2014-15 Milan Sureshbhai Parikh 6. In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 31/10/2022 by placing result on notice board. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (DR. A. L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat, Dated: 31/10/2022 SAMANTA Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. Pr.CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File /True copy/ By order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat