Anil Kumar Rastogi, Jalaun V. Income Tax Officer, Kanpur

ITA 389/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 38923714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PINKI MAHAWAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R R JAIN
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

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.389/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2003-04 ANIL KUMAR RASTOGI 95, BALDAU CHOWK ORAI, JALAUN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 6(2) KANPUR TAN/PAN:ABVPR9920N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. R. R. JAIN, C.A. RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PINKI MAHAWAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 28 07 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14 08 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED C.I.T.(A), IS UNJUSTIFIED, UNWARRANTED, UNFOUNDED AND AS SUCH DESERVES TO BE QUASHED BECAUSE:- 1. THE FINDING RECORDED BY LEARNED C.I.T. (A) TO THE EFFECT THAT SPECIFIED SHARE OF THE APPELLANT INLAND STANDS UNPROVED IS PERVERSE AND MISPLACED SINCE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF SHARE BEING 1/16 AS AGAINST 1/8 WAS ON RECORD OF LEARNED A.O. 2. LEARNED C.I.T.(A) HAS ALTOGETHER IGNORED THE REQUEST OF APPELLANT PUT ON RECORD OF LEARNED A.O. TO REFER THE MATTER OF VALUATION OF LAND IN QUESTION TO VALUATION OFFICER U/S 50C(2). 3. LEARNED CIT'S RELIANCE UPON VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX PARTE IS OUT OF CONTEXT AND MISPLACED. :- 2 -: 4. IN ANY CASE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE APPELLATE ORDER AS SO PASSED IS ARBITRARY AND UNSUSTAINABLE. 2. THIS APPEAL IS FILED LATE BY 6 DAYS FOR WHICH AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. BEING CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADJUDICATED THE APPEAL WITHOUT AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 27.1.2014. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LAST DATE FIXED FOR HEARING WAS 30.9.2013 AND THEREAFTER HE HAS NOT FIXED THE APPEAL FOR HEARING AND DISPOSED OF THE SAME ON 27.1.2014 DISMISSING THE APPEAL SUMMARILY. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE LIGHT OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND HE HAS NOT RECORDED ANY FINDING WITH REGARD TO THE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING UPON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE :- 3 -: SUMMARILY WITHOUT AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 14 TH AUGUST, 2015 JJ:2807 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR