ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, MIRZAPUR V. JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (I & CI), LUCKNOW

ITA 35/ALLD/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9567 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARVEEN GODBOLE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 13; 272A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD SMC BENCH , ALLAHABAD [ THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ] BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I . T . A . NO . 35 /ALLD/20 20 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 13 - 1 4 SHRI A SHOK KUMAR SINGH , KAILHAT CHUNA PACHEWARA , MIRZAPUR - 231305 V S . JOINT DIRECTO R OF INCOME TAX (I& CI) , LUCKNOW PAN: ASFPS0268R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI PARVEEN GODBOLE , C . A RESPONDENT BY SHRI A.K. SINGH , SR . D . R DATE OF HEARING 27 /0 7 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28 /07 / 2021 O R D E R VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24 TH OCTO BER, 2019 OF CIT ( APPEALS ) ARISING FROM PENALTY PASSED UNDER SECTION 272A (2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 1 4 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - (I). THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER PENALTY ORDER DATED 07.10.2016 PASSED U/S 272A (2) OF THE IT ACT BY IMPOSING A PENALTY OF RS. 38,000/ - IN ARBITRARY MANNER BY THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) AND HIS ACTION AS CONFIRMED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) IGNORING THE CORRECT FACTS AND MERIT OF THE CASE IS BAD BOTH ON THE FACTS AND IN LAW. ITA NO. 35 /ALLD/2020 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH 2 (II). THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 07.10.2016 BY IMP OSING A PENALTY OF RS. 38,000/ - WAS PASSED BY THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) LUCKNOW IN HASTE WITHOUT ANY VALID REASON AS WELL AS HIS ACTION WAS CONFIRMED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) VIDE HIS EX - PARTE ORDER DATED 24.10.2019 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE CORRECT FACTS AND MERIT OF THE CASE WHICH IS INCORRECT AND ILLEGAL, HENCE THE OF PENALTY IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. (III). THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER THE PENALTY WAS IMPOSED AND CONFIRM ED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN ARBITRARY MANNER BY PASSING EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING REASONABLE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE NATURAL JUSTICE, HENCE THE PENALTY DESERVES TO BE DELETED IN I NTEREST OF JUSTICE. (IV). THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER THE APPELLANT RESERVES HIS RIGHT TO TAKE ANY FURTHER GROUND BEFORE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT (APPEAL) HAS DISMISSED AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WHILE PASSING THE IMPUGNED EX - PARTE ORDER . HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ALLEGED NOTICES ISSUED BEFORE THE CIT (APPEAL) WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE BELO NGS TO A REMOTE RURAL AREA. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING BEFORE THE CIT (APPEAL) . H ENCE, THE LD.AR HAS PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN ONE OR MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE CIT (APPEAL). 4. ON THE OTHER HAN D THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT (APPEAL) HAS GIVEN THE DETAILS OF THE NOTICES ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THERE WAS NON - COMPLIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT (APPEAL). THUS, THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT DESERVE ANY FURTHER O PPORTUNITY. 5 . I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORD. THE CIT (APPEAL) HAS GIVEN THE DETAILS OF THE NOTICES ISSUED AND SENT ITA NO. 35 /ALLD/2020 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH 3 THROUGH ITBA NETWOR K /SPEED - POST. THOUGH THE CIT (APPEAL) HAS MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE E - MAIL ADDRESS/SPEED POST SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, T HERE IS NO SPECIFIC MENTIONED ABOUT WHICH OF THE NOTICE S WAS SERVED THROUGH WHICH MODE. I F THE NOTICES WERE ISSUED THROUGH E - MA IL AND THE E - MAIL WAS GIVEN OF SOME OTHER PERSON THEN, THE POSSIBILITY OF NON - RECEIPT OF SUCH NOTICES BY ASSESSEE CANNOT BE RULED OUT. IN FORM NO. 35 THE E - MAIL ADDRESS IS GIVEN AS [e-mail] WHICH APPEARS TO BE A GENERAL E - MAIL ID NOT BELONGING TO ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHEN THE ASSESS HAS EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON - APPEARANCE AND THE CIT(APPEAL) HAS CONFIRMED THE PENALTY DUE TO NON - APPEARANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE, AND FOR WANT OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DEFAULT OF COMPLIANCE TO NOTICES ISSUED BY THE A.O. U/S 133 (6) OF THE ACT T HE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEAL) IS SET ASIDE AND MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE RECORD OF THE CIT (APPEAL) FOR FRESH ADJUDICAT ION AFTER GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. THE O RDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ON 28 /07/ 2021. SD/ - SD SD/ - / - (VIJAY PAL RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ALLAHABAD DATED: 28 /0 7 /2021 KD . COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT ITA NO. 35 /ALLD/2020 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH 4 5. THE DR, I.T.A.T. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER (I.T.A.T., ALLAHABAD) TRUE COPY