Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd., Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3380/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4274 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VAS HANTHAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3380DEL/2017 ASSTT. YEAR 2007-08 ORION PACKWELL PVT. LTD. 52, TRILOKIYA APARTMENT, PLOT NO. 85, I.P. EXTENSION, PATPARGANJ DELHI VS. ITO WARD -13(4) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAACO8029Q APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. T. VAS HANTHAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 .9.2017 ORDER PER N.K.SAINI, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 01.03.2017 OF CIT(A)- 7, NEW DELHI. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. I, THEREFORE, P ROCEED EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL REL ATES TO THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 13,00,000/- . 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2007 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 1,04,770/-. T HE AO FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT EX PARTE U/S 147 READ WITH SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,00,000/- . 2 ITA NO. 3380/DEL/2017 ORION PACKWELL PVT. LTD. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO PASSED THE EX PARTE ORDER BY OBSERVING THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 10.2.2017 WAS ISSUED ON 31.1.2017 WHICH WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 6. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPE ARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) INSPITE OF VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN SO, THERE WA S NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX PARTE. 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. DR A ND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HIMSELF ADMITTED IN PARA 3 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT FEW O F THE NOTICES RETURNED BACK UN- SERVED. HE ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE LAST NOTICE DATE D 31.1.2017 WAS ISSUED FOR HEARING ON 10.2.2017 BUT NON-ATTENDED, HOWEVER, NOT HING IS BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE SAID NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON T HE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UN-HEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PERTAM. I, THEREFORE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET A SIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A ) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 . 09.201 7.) SD/- (N.K.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 25 /09/2017 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3 ITA NO. 3380/DEL/2017 ORION PACKWELL PVT. LTD. DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 18.09.2017 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 18.09.2017 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.