Smt. Ragini Tripathi, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer- 2(3), Kanpur

ITA 396/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5241 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.396/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.396/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 SMT. RAGINI TRIPATHI, FLAT NO. 202, 111/M/5, RATANKRUTI APARTMENT, KAKADEO, KANPUR. PAN:ACCPT 8157 F VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-1, KANPUR DATED 23/03/2018 PERTAINING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2014- 2015. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL NONE APPEARED O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE, I DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APP EAL AFTER HEARING LEARNED D. R. AND CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD . I NOTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER AS ACCORDING T O HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON THE DATES WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE C IT(A) HAD ISSUED VARIOUS NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, NEITHER ANYBODY AP PEARED NOR FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND ULTIMATELY THE CIT(A) PASSED THE EX -PARTE ORDER AND UPHELD APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 22/10/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22 / 10 /201 8 I.T.A. NO.396/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, I FEEL TH AT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEARNED CIT(A) H AS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250 WHIC H DEALS WITH THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIG HT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN THE N ATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORT UNITY. I AM OF THE VIEW FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPE AL BY THE CIT(A). I, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO- OPERATE WITH LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APP EAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/10 /2018) SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:22/10/2018 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW