M/s Model Tanners (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur V. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

ITA 319/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3997 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.318 & 319/LKW/16 A.YR.:2009-10 & 2005-06 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.318 & 319/LKW/2016 ASSTT. YEAR:2009-10 & 2005-06 M/S MODEL TANNERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., C/O SULTAN TANNERS, JAJMAU, KANPUR. PAN:AAACM9319D VS. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M. THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-IV, KANPUR BOTH DATED 2 9/03/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 & 2005-06. 2. NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. EVEN THOUG H AN APPLICATION DATED 23/08/2016 SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PLAUSIBLE REASON, THE SAID APPLICATION STANDS DISMI SSED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D. R., CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITI ES BELOW. WE NOTED FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THAT THE HEARING IN BOTH THE CA SES BY THE CIT(A) WAS FIXED FOR 15/07/2014 AND 09/03/2016 ON WHICH DATE, NONE ATTENDED ON APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI AJIT KUMAR SINGH , CIT, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 01/09/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 /0 9 /2016 I.T.A. NO.318 & 319/LKW/16 A.YR.:2009-10 & 2005-06 2 BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT CLEAR F ROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WHETHER THESE NOTICES WERE ACTUALLY SERVED ON THE A SSESSEE OR NOT. THE CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT ISSUING AN Y FURTHER NOTICE WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. UNDER T HESE FACTS, IT IS CLEAR THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTE R BACK TO HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL GIVE PROPER OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE HIM. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/09/2016 SD/. SD/. ( ABY T. VARKEY ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:16/09/2016 *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 ASSTT. R EGISTRAR