M/s Sat Pal Goel Prop., Panipat V. ITO, Panipat

ITA 3896/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52982 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 24-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: K C ANEJA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO: 3896/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2007-08 M/S SAT PAL GOEL TEXTILE MILLS VS. ITO, WARD 4 PANIPAT PANIPAT (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. KC ANEJA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.MOHANTY, D.R. O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 30.5.2011 OF CIT, KARNAL PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2007-08 WHEREIN VARIOUS GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HE ARING THE PARTIES WERE HEARD REGARDING GROUND NO.1 WHICH IS REPRODUCE D HEREUNDER. ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED A PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN. HENCE THE ORDER OF HONBLE CIT(A) IS LIAB LE TO BE SET ASIDE. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CHALLEN GED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE DATE OF H EARING FIXED BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY WAS 12 TH MAY, 2011. ON THE SAID DATE SHRI JB SHARMA, ADVOCATE ATTENDED AND SOUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS GRANTED. THE APPEAL AS SUCH WAS ADJOURNED TO 23 RD MAY, 2011. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON THE SAID DATE NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR 2 ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED BY THE CIT (A). IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MA DE BY THE A.O. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING MR.K.C.ANEJA, C.A. APPEA RED BEFORE THE BENCH AND SOUGHT TIME STATING THAT HE HAS BEEN ENGA GED RECENTLY AND NEEDS TO FILE A PAPER BOOK. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A FIRE ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE REPRESEN TED. CONSIDERING THE FACTS THAT NO SUBMISSIONS WERE ADVANCED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AS THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED, THE LD.D.R. HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). IN T HE AFORE MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIE W THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ISSUE SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO TH E FILE OF CIT(A. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PLACE HIS FACTS, AR GUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS ON RECORD IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ITS CLAIM AND THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL CONSIDER THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER THEREON. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AFFORDED A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH OCTOBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (B.C.MEENA ) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24 TH OCTOBER, 2011 *MANGA 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CI T(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR // C O P Y //