SHRI SHARANJIT SINGH , JALANDHAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD III (2), JALANDHAR

ITA 380/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6930 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VEDPAL SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside; Audi alteram partem

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH SMC AT JALANDHAR BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO.380/ASR./2018 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 SHARANJIT SINGH, S/O LATE SH. JOGINDER SINGH, VPO-NANGAL LUBANA, DISTRICT KAPURTHALA-144631 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-III(2), JALANDHAR-144001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. ADBPS1292C ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. VED PA L SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 08.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.01.2019 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.10.2016 OF LD. CIT(A)-2,JALANDHAR. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L: 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) FELL INTO GRAVE ERROR IN DECIDING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE BY PASSING A NON-SPEAKING ORDER. 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) I S NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,11,000 /- MADE BY THE AO. 3. ANY OTHER GROUND WHICH MAY BE RAISED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IS DECIDED EX-PARTE AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. ITA NO. 380/ASR./2018 SHARANJIT S INGH 2 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.06.2008 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.1 ,53,559/-. LATER ON, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. THE A O FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT AT AN INCOME OF RS.6,66,363/- BY MAKING THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE ISSUE ON MERIT. HE MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICES WERE ISSUED ON VARIOUS D ATES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. 6. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. DR STRONG LY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NON- COOPERATIVE AND DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ), SO THERE WAS NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL. 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE CASE ON MERIT. HE SIMPLY STATED THAT THE NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON VARIOUS DATE. HOWEVER, NOWHERE IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICES WERE SERVE D UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEAR D AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. I, THEREFORE, BY CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE F ACTS, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE A ND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 380/ASR./2018 SHARANJIT S INGH 3 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 08/01/2019) SD/- (N. K. SAINI) VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 08/01/2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR