Shri Dinesh Joitaji Thakor, Mehsana V. The Income Tax Officer, Patan Ward-3, Mehsana

ITA 3482/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1480 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Section: 10; 11

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO S . 3480, 3481 & 3482 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 10 - 11 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S S GODARA JM ] I.T.A. NO S . 3480, 3481 & 3482 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 10 - 11 DINESH JOITAJI THAKOR .......... .APPELLANT POST: GOTHA V A, TAL: VISNAGAR, DIST. MEHSANA . [PAN: A JYPT 6486 E ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATAN WARD - 3, MEHSANA . ............ . RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: S.N. DIVATIA , FOR THE APPELLANT R.K. GUPTA , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : APRIL 6 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MAY 31 ST , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM : BY WAY OF TH ESE APPEAL S , THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE THREE EX - PARTE ORDER S, ALL DATED 04.09.2 015, PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11 . AS ALL THESE THREE APPEALS PERTAIN TO THE SAME ASSESSEE, ARE FOR THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR, AND WERE HEARD TOGETHER, AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE, WE ARE DISPOSING OF THESE APPEALS BY THIS CONSO LIDATED ORDER. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, IT WAS NOTICED THAT NONE HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THAT THE MATTER HAS BEEN, THEREFORE, DECIDED EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). I.T.A. NO S . 3480, 3481 & 3482 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 10 - 11 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. LEARNED COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE MATTER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR ALLEGED NON - COMPLIANCE WITH THE NOTICES OF HEARING ISSUED BY HIM DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS . 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE MUCH TO SAY ON THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER BUT HE CONTENDED THAT AT BEST THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMITTED TO THE LEANED CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS RATHER THAN OUR TAKING A CALL ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 5. I N VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS , WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION DENOVO. WHILE DOING SO, LEARNED CIT(A) WILL GIVE A FRESH OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND SHALL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WRIT TEN AND ORAL SUBMISSIONS AS THE ASSESSEE MAY LIKE TO MAKE AND DECIDE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEAL S ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPE N COURT TODAY ON THE 31 ST DAY OF MAY , 2016. SD/ - SD/ - S S GODARA PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 31 ST DAY OF MAY , 2016. PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELL ANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD