M/s. Super Shiv Shakti Minchem Pvt. Ltd., JODHPUR V. ITO, Ward-3, , BHILWARA

ITA 392/JODH/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7447 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K SINGI LD
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.392/JODH/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD. C-111, SHASTRI NAGAR, BHILWARA. [PAN :AALCS 8492A] VS . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, BHILWARA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K. SINGI , LD. DR DATE OF HEARING: 30/04/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30/04/2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE/APPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.07.2017 IMPUGNED HEREIN PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER U/S 250(6) OF THE I.T. ACT (HEREI NAFTER CALLED AS THE 'ACT') WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS AFFIRMED THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER DATED 04.11.2016 PASSED U/S 144 R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT BY T HE ITO, WARD-3, BHILWARA. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE HAS BEEN PASSED AS AN EX-PARTE AND FROM PARA NO.3 OF TH E ORDER, IT REFLECTS THAT THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FIXED THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON VARIOUS DATES, HOWEVER, NO ONE HAS ATTENDED ON ANY OF THE D ATE OF HEARING AND NO WRITTEN SUBMISSION HAS BEEN FILED, THEREFORE , THE APPEAL HAS 2 ITA NO.392/JODH/2017 SUPE R SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD. VS. ITO BEEN DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL ONLY. WE REALIZED THAT FROM THE ORDER IT DOES NOT REFLEC T THAT NOTICE OF HEARING HAS EVER BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE FOR ANY DATE AS MENTIONED IN PARA NO.3 OF THE ORDER, NEITHER THE LD . CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED QUA MODE OF SERVICE TO THE ASSESSEE, HENC E FOR SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW BEST PROPER COURSE WOULD BE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE AND TO RESTORE BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH. CONSEQUENTL Y, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR DECISIO N AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITIES OF BE ING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO ORDERED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL CO-OPER ATE WITH THE APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS AND SHALL APPEAR AS AND WHEN REQUIRED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND IN CASE OF FAILURE ON ITS PART THE L D. CIT(A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO DRAW THE ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE A SSESSEE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.04.2019. SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) ( N.K.CHOUDHRY) VICE PRESIDENT JUD ICIAL MEMBER DATED:30/04/2019 PK/PS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR