Harsoria Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT (OSD), New Delhi

ITA 392/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 39220114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 28-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 25-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: MANU KUMAR GIRI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH C DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 392(DEL)2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 HARSORIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED, DY.COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C/O SH.ANUP SHARMA, ADVOCATE, V. (OSD), CIT -IV, CR BLDG.,N.DELHI. 108, LAWYERS CHAMBER, DELHI HIGH COURT, NEW DELHI-110003. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SAT PAL SINGH, SR. DR ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, J.M THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 008-09, RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW A ND VOID AB INITIO. 2. THE HONBLE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS THAT THE NON- ATTENDANCE WAS DUE TO SITUATION BEYO ND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ADDITIONS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. ITA 392(DEL)2012 2 4. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAS BEEN PASSED IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE A ND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF ADDITIONS IN THE CASE. THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE AND THE CASE DES ERVES TO BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF FACTS AND LAW BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES ORDE R EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, OBSERVING, INTER ALIA, AS FOLLOWS:- 3. BEFORE ADJUDICATING THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL , IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS OF THIS OFF ICE, WHICH WILL SHOW THAT ENOUGH OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE AP PELLANT AND RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ARE BEING DULY ADHERED TO. S.NO. DATE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE DATE OF HEARING REMARKS I. 22.09.2011 03.10.2011 APPELLANT REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT AS ATTORNEY WAS BUSY IN FINALIZATION OF ACCOUNT. REQUEST WAS ACCEDED AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 19.10.2011. II. 19.10.2011 APPELLANT REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR 2 WEEKS, ON THE GROUND THAT THERE HAS BEEN A DEATH IN FRIENDS CIRCLE. REQUEST WAS AGAIN ACCEDED FOR AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 01.11.2011. III. 01.11.2011 APPELLANT APPEARED BUT NO SUBMISSIONS MADE AND HE WAS REQUESTED TO GIVE THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS ON THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 15.11.2011. IV. 15.11.2011 APPELLANT AGAIN REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR A WEEK AS THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF COLLECTING DETAILS. ADJOURNMENT REQUEST WAS ACCEDED AND CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 21.11.2011. V. 21.11.2011 THE APPELLANTS REPRESENTATIVE MR. SANJIB EMPLOYEE OF APPELLANTS COUNSEL, WHO HAVE ITA 392(DEL)2012 3 BEEN APPEARING EARLIER FOR ADJOURNMENT, AGAIN APPEARED WITH THE REQUEST LETTER AND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR 25.11.2011, AS DETAILS ARE UNDER COMPILATION. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 28.11.2011 AND IT WAS TOLD THAT ENOUGH ADJOURNMENT HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED AND IF ON 28.11.2011 SUBMISSIONS ARE NOT MADE, ISSUE WILL BE DECIDED ON MERITS. VI. 28.11.2011 NONE APPEARED. THE ABOVE RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SHOWS THAT APPELLAN T HAS BEEN GIVEN 6 OPPORTUNITIES IN MORE THAN 2 AND MONTHS AND IN SPITE OF THAT HE HAS BEEN SEEKING ADJOURNMENTS ON ONE PRETEXT OR THE OTHER. IT IS ALSO WORTH MENTIONING HERE THAT WHATEVER TIME WAS SOUGHT BY HIM, THE REQUEST WAS ACCEDED TO, SO THAT RULES OF NATURAL JU STICE ARE BEING FOLLOWED. BUT THE ATTITUDE FROM THE APPELLANTS S IDE HAS ALWAYS BEEN NOT POSITIVE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HOLD THAT APPELLANT HAS NO EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL, ACCOR DINGLY I UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE AO IN MAKING ADDITIONS. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITT ED BEFORE US THAT INDEED, THERE HAS BEEN A LAPSE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A )INASMUCH AS THE EARLIER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, SHRI RAKESH AGGARWAL, FOR THE REASONS BEST KNOWN TO HIM, KEPT ON TAKING REPEA TED ADJOURNMENTS AND DID NOT APPEAR ON THE LAST EFFECTIVE DATE OF HEARIN G, I.E., 28.11.2011, AS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A); THAT HOWEVER, NOW THE MATTER IS BEING REPRESENTED BY THE PRESENT FRESHLY APPOINTED ADVOCATE, I.E., SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI. SHRI GIRI SEEKING INTELLIGENCE OF THE BENCH, STATES AT THE BA R THAT IF THE MATTER IS ITA 392(DEL)2012 4 REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), HE ENSURES COMP LETE DUE COMPLIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A). 4. IT IS SETTLED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT SUFFE R FOR THE FAULT OF THE COUNSEL. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE US THA T IT WAS DUE TO REPEATED NON-APPEARANCE OF THE EARLIER COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE THAT THE MATTER WENT UN-REPRESENTED BEFORE THE CIT(A). IT HAS BEEN STATE D THAT THE PRESENT COUNSEL HAS BEEN FRESHLY APPOINTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSURANCE OF FULL COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN GIVEN IF THE MATTER IS REMITTE D TO THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH HEARING. 5. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THEREFORE, WE REMIT THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ON HEARING THE ASSESSEE. WITHOUT DOUBT, THE ASSESSEE SHALL CO-OP ERATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOUR NMENT UNNECESSARILY. ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.03.2012. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (A.D. JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28.03.2012 *RM ITA 392(DEL)2012 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR