S.Usha, CHENNAI V. ITO, Pondicherry

ITA 3405/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7406 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI . , [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO. 3405/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-2003. SMT. S. USHA, L/H. LATE SHRI. K.SATHYANARAYANA, PROP:- M/S. FANCY TRADERS, NO.19, KAMARAJ SALAI, VVP NAGAR, THATTANCHAVADY, PONDICHERRY. [ PAN AASPS 4878C ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(2) PONDICHERRY ( !' / APPELLANT) ( #$!' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, JCIT. /DATE OF HEARING : 02-03-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-03-2017 % / O R D E R IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT GRIEVANCE IS THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD DISMISSED ITS APPEAL IN LIMINE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS. 2. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. A PERUSAL OF THE O RDER OF THE LD. ITA NO. 3405/MDS/2016 :- 2 -: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISPOSED OF EX-PARTE FOR WANT OF APPE ARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OR ITS LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. NO DOUBT LARGE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSEE BUT STILL ASSESSEE DID NO T ENTER APPEARANCE. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAD COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT APPLYING 6.03% AS GROSS PROFIT RATIO ON TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE WHO WAS A DEALER OF INDIAN MADE FOREIGN LIQUOR AGAINST 4.44% ADMITTED B Y THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRODUCED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HOWEVER, WHEN ASSESSEE MOVED IN APPEAL, LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) DID NOT DEAL WITH THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL. SEC.25 0(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) REQUIRES THE L D. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL STAT ING POINTS FOR DETERMINATION THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASONS FOR REACHING THE DECISION. CONSIDERING THE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF T HE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE CAN BE GIVEN ONE LAST CHANCE FOR REPRESENT ING ITS CASE BEFORE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ORDER O F THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE A ND THE APPEAL IS REMITTED BACK TO HIS FILE FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY, ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN ONLY ONE OPPORTUNITY FOR ITA NO. 3405/MDS/2016 :- 3 -: PRESENTING HIS CASE, CONSIDERING PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017, AT CHENNAI SD/- ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED:29TH MARCH, 2017 KV &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. +,- / CIT(A) 5. )./ 0 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. + / CIT 6. /12 / GF