Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd., Pilibhit V. Income Tax Officer, Lakhimpur-Kheri

ITA 344/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 34423714 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Non compliance

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.344/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011 - 12 SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD., PURANPUR, PILIBHIT. PAN:AAALS0926R VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, LAKHIMPUR KHERI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI SHUBHAM RASTOGI, C. A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 01/09/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 4 /09/2015 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (APPEALS), BAREILLY DATED 24/03/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12. 2. GROUND NO. 1 IS AS UNDER: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON COMPLIANCE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AS PER THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), ONLY ONE NOTICE DATED 04/03/2015 WAS ISSUED THROUGH SPEED POST FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 18/03/2015. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT NONE APPEARED BEFORE CIT(A) ON THIS DATE BECAUSE OF SOME PROBLEMS BUT CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED SOME MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE PASSIN G EX - PARTE ORDER. 2 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT IF THERE WAS SOME PROBLEM WITH THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THIS DATE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST ASKED FOR ADJOURNMENT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. W E ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT PROVIDING ONLY ONE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS ADEQUATE AND HENCE, WE FEEL THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER SHOULD GO TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE ENTIRE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE SIDES. 6. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO. 1 AS PER ABOVE PARA , OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT DO NOT CALL FOR ANY ADJUDICATION AT THIS STAGE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 4 /09/2015 *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 ASSTT. REGISTRAR