Sh. Surinder Garg, Panchkula V. DCIT, CC-I, Chandigarh

ITA 337/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4078 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D S KALYAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 337/CHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) SHRI SURENDER GARG, VS. THE DCIT, HOUSE NO. 81, CIRCLE 2(1), SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH. PANCHKULA. PAN NO. ABEPG3330J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIKHIL GOYAL, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI D.S. KALYAN, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING : 26.06.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.08.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILIN G THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2018 OF CIT(A)-3, GU RGAON PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE PARTIES W ERE HEARD ONLY IN RESPECT OF GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 WHICH READ AS UNDER : 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3 , GURGAON HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE EX-PARTE ORDER AND, AS SUCH, THE DIS MISSAL OF APPEAL BY THE CIT(A) IS NOT PROPER. 2. THAT THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL HAD APPEARED ON THE EAR LIER DATES BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AT HIS CAMP OFFICE, AT CHANDIGARH AND IT IS ONLY ON 19.01.2018 THAT DUE TO SOME CONFUSION, NOBODY COULD APPEAR BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND, THUS, NO REASONABLE/SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY HAV E BEEN AFFORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DISMISSING TH E APPEAL EX-PARTE. 3. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSE D BY THE CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE EARLIER TWO DATES AND ONLY ON THE LAST DATE, THE A SSESSEE DUE TO MISCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND HIS COUNSEL, CO ULD NOT BE REPRESENTED. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT AN OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AS DUE TO SOME MISCOMMUNICATION WITH HIS COUNSEL, HE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. SR.DR. ACCEPTING THE ORAL UNDERT AKING GIVEN BY THE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT ABUSE TH E TRUST AND ITA 337/CHD/2018 A.Y.2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 PARTICIPATE FULLY AND FAIRLY, IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO S ET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTIO N TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASS ESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.08.2018. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SING H) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.