M/s Bhanushali Farms, V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhuj

ITA 370/RJT/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 37024914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MJ RANPURA
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH SMC, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI A.L. GEHLOT (AM) ITA NO.370/RJT/2011 - AY 2004-05 ITA NO.372/RJT/2011 - AY 2006-07 M/S BHANUSHALI FARMS VS ITO, GANDHIDHAM WARD.1 SHIV SHAKTI, BHARAPAR (DHUFI) BHUJ TAL : ABDASA, KUTCH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING : 24-10-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24-10-2011 APPELLANT BY : SHRI MJ RANPURA RESPONDENT BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION O R D E R THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST ORDER OF CIT(A)-XX, AHMEDABAD DATED 2004-05. 2. APART FROM THE GROUNDS RELATING TO MERIT, THE AS SESSEE HAS RAISED A COMMON GROUND IN BOTH THE APPEALS STATING THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EXPARTE. THE LD.DR INSTEAD O F PUTTING HIS PERSONAL APPEARANCE, HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. 3. THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEALS AS T HERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO NOTICE SENT THROUGH RPAD. ON PERUSAL OF ORDER O F CIT(A) I NOTICE THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY HIM IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT. THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS NOT SPEAKING ORDER. T HEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT EVEN IF THE CIT(A) HAD TO MAKE EXPARTE ORDER, THE O RDER SHOULD BE IN LINE WITH ITA 370 & 372/RJT/2011 2 PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT. THE ORDER SHOULD STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 HAS ALSO BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE AS THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE CITA). HERE ALSO THE O RDER OF CIT(A) IS INFIRM INASMUCH AS THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) O F THE ACT ARE NOT STRICTLY ADHERED TO. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, I HOLD THE CIT(A) HAS TO DECIDE THE APPEALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AFTER PROVIDING OPPORTUN ITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY BOTH THE APPEALS ARE RESTORE D TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE MATTERS AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ( A.L. GEHLOT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RAJKOT, DT : 24-10-2011 PK/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A)-XX, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT-I, RAJKOT 5. THE DR (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER SR. PS, ITAT, RAJKOT BENCH