Shri Ramesh Kumar Jalan , Bangalore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(3)(1), Bangalore

ITA 3208/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7722 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B ALARAM P R AO
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM ITA NO. 3208/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 14 SHRI RAMESH KUMAR JALAN , FLAT H 1006, SNN RAJ LAKE VIEW APARTMENTS, PHASE II, BILLEKAHALLI, RANKA C, OFF BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560076. PAN: AAYPJ7866P VS. ITO, WARD 4 (3) (1), BANGALORE APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : S HREE BALARAM P RAO, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : S HRI SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL , ADDL. CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 28 . 1 1 .20 19 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 . 0 1.20 20 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, AM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE EX PARTE ORDER OF CIT(A) 4 BENGALURU DATED 24.07.2018 FOR A. Y. 2013 14. 2. SINCE THIS ORDER OF CIT (A) IS EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, WE FIRST DECIDE THIS ASPECT AS TO WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE RESTORED BACK TO CIT (A) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH SIDES BECAUSE IF WE FEEL IT PROPER TO REMAND THE MATTER TO CIT (A) THAN THERE IS NO NEED TO DISCUSS ABOUT MERIT OF THE ISSUES RAISED BEFORE US. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT IS NOTED BY CIT (A) IN FIRST PARA OF HIS ORDER THAT IN SPITE OF SEVERAL NOTICES ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO. 4 RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED THESE NOTICES ISSUED BY CIT (A) BECAUSE THESE NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO OLD ADDRESS AND NOT THE NEW ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM 35. HE SUBMITTED THAT UNDER THESE FACTS AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ENTIRE MATTER ITA NOS.3208(B)/2018 PAGE 2 OF 2 SHOULD BE RESTORED TO CIT 9A) FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IS DIFFERENT AND THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER FORM 35 FILED BEFORE CIT (A) IS DIFFERENT. IN THE FORM 36 FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE ADDRESS IS SAME AS GIVEN IN FORM 35. UNDER THESE FACTS, WE FIND FORCE IN THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED BY CIT (A) WERE NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE FEEL IT PROPER TO RESTORE BACK THE MATTER TO CIT (A) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH SIDES. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. IN VIEW OF THIS, NO ADJUDICATION ON MERIT IS CALLED FOR AT THE PRESENT STAGE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 29 TH JANUARY, 2020. /NS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT (A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.