Shri Reet Ram, Bareilly V. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3), Bareilly

ITA 335/LKW/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6713 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2019
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.335/LKW/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.335/LKW/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 SHRI REET RAM, S/O SHRI ANGAN LAL, 22, VILLAGE DHAURERA MAFI, IZZATNAGAR, BAREILLY. PAN:ATQPR 1725 G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), BAREILLY. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), BAREILLY DATED 08/03/2019 PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE THRESHOLD, WE NOTED THAT WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED. WE FIND THAT PR OPER NOTICE OF HEARING HAS ALREADY BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. I NOTED THA T THIS IS A CASE WHERE THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE APPEAL WAS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 14 DAYS. IN HIS ORDER, UNDER PARA 2.0, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED THAT IN COLUMN NO. 14 OF FORM NO. 35, THE ASSESSEE HAS MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING OF APPEA L WHICH MEANS THAT ASSESSEE WAS UNDER IMPRESSION THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY HIM IS WITHIN THE TIME. LEARNED CIT(A) HAD ISSUED VARIOUS NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 29/07/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31 / 07 /201 9 I.T.A. NO.335/LKW/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 2 BEFORE HIM, HOWEVER, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILED ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. UNDER THESE FAC TS, LEARNED CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE. WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL HE HAS ALSO NOT CONDONED THE DELAY OF 14 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, I FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPE AL ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE PROCE DURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD A T THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN THE NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO A PPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOU T GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. I AM OF THE VIEW FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUFFICIE NT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). I, THEREFOR E, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE OR DER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIREC TION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT TO SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO-OPERATE WITH L EARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRE CTED TO FILE CONDONATION APPLICATION DULY SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT AND PROPER EVIDENCE WHICH LEARNED CIT(A) SHALL CONSIDER SYMPATHETICALLY AND SHALL DEC IDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/07 /2019) SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:31/07/2019 *SINGH I.T.A. NO.335/LKW/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 3 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