M/s. Dimension Designers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3228/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1288 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK SEHGAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH `B : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3228/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) DIMENSION DESIGNERS PVT. LTD., VS. ITO, WARD 10(3 ) W-26, GREATER KAILASH, PART-II, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN/GIR NO.AAACD4716D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJEEV SABHARWAL, CA, REVENUE BY : SHRI DEEPAK SEHGAL, SR.DR ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)- XIII, NEW DELHI DATED 24.04.2012, RELEVANT TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2008-09, WHEREBY BESIDES CHALLENGING NON AFFORDING OF REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED CONFIRMATION OF THE ADDITION WITHOUT CON SIDERING THEM ON MERITS. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE NONE OF THE NOTICES COULD BE SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. SO, ASS ESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE CIT(A) FOR APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. BUT, CIT(A) HAS JUST UPHEL D THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT CONSIDERING OR DISCUSSING THE GROUNDS, RAIS ED IN THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND IT IS LIABLE TO BE SE T ASIDE AND MATTER MAY BE RESTORED FOR RE- DECIDING THE APPEAL AFRESH. 3. LD.DR HAS BEEN HEARD, WHO DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJE CT TO THE CONTENTION OF THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMITTED THAT MATTER CAN BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR RE-CONSIDERATION. I.T.A. NO.3228/DEL./2012 (A.Y. : 2008-09) 2 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND FIND THAT AGAINST ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APP EAL BEFORE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHO FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF NOTICES HAS JUST CONFIRME D THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT CONSIDERING AND DISCUSSING THE CASE ON MERI TS. SINCE, FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS REQUIRED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS, EVEN IF, A SSESSEE DOES PUT ITS APPEARANCE, THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RES TORE THE MATTER BACK ON HIS FILE WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ASSESSING OFFICER. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE GETS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04.01.2013. SD/- SD/- (T.S. KAPOOR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : JAN. 04 , 2013 SKB COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (CONCERNED). 4. CIT(A)-XIII, NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT) DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT