Shri Upendra Kumar Singh, Kanpur V. DY. Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Kanpur

ITA 325/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1114 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEARNED CITA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.325/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.325/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 SHRI UPENDRA KUMAR SINGH, C-21, PANKI INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITE-I, KANPUR. PAN:ALJPS 9333 E VS. DY.C.I.T.-II, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 16/01/2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED A. R. INVITED OUR ATTENTI ON TO THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE IS FULLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF ITS APPEAL. IT WAS SU BMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAD SENT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING OF THE CASE AT THE ADDRESS OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHEREAS THE CORRECT ADDRESS OF THE ASSES SEE IS DIFFERENT AND IN THIS RESPECT FILED A COPY OF ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A ) DATED 12/01/2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 WHEREIN THE CORRECT ADDRESS HAS BEEN MENTIONED APPELLANT BY SHRI ASHUTOSH AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY S HRI YASHVENDRA SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 20/02/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21 / 02 /201 8 I.T.A. NO.325/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 2 AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE A SSESSEE UNDER SIMILAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYED THAT EITHER THE CASE BE DECIDED ON MERITS FOLLOWING THE EARLIER YEARS ORDE R OR THE CASE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO LEARNED CIT(A) FOR PASSING FRESH ORDER ON MERITS. 3. LEARNED D. R. SUPPORTED THE SECOND CONTENTION OF LEARNED A. R. THAT THE CASE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO LEARNED CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED THE ORDER ON MERIT AND HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON PROSECUTION. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ISSUED VARIOUS NOTICES AT TH E ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO.35 FOR WHICH LEARNED CIT(A) CANNOT BE SAID TO HAVE COMMITTED ANY MISTAKE. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS AN ORDER AF TER GOING THROUGH THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLESS TO MENTION, THE ASSESSEE WILL BE PROVIDED SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/02 /2018) SD/. SD/. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:21/02/2018 *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