Hazorilal & Sons Jewellers P. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4059/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4103 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 3
• Next Hearing Date: 09-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B RAMANJANYULA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-3 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 4059/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 M/S HAZORILAL & SONS JEWELLERS P. LTD. VS. DCIT, C ENTRAL CIRCLE 22, M-44, GREATER KAILASH-I (MARKET) NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 048 (PAN: AABCH0480R) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL JAIN, CA REVENUE BY : SH. B. RAMANJANYULA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING ON : 09/08/2016 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON :10/08/201 6 PER H.S. SIDHU, JM ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.5.2014 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), NEW DELHI RELAT ING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING LEVY OF PENALTY ON THE APPELLANT BY AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF RS 1,76,269/-. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD. C IT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACT OF AO OF TREATING INADVERTENT BON FIDE SMALL MISTAKE BY APPELLANT AS FURNISHING OF INACCUR ATE PARTICULARS OR CONCEALING PARTICULARS OF ITS INCOME . 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD. C IT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ERROR INCURRED BY APPE LLANT OF NOT DISALLOWING A SMALL AMOUNT OF RS. 1,13,583/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOSS ON SALE OF ASSET AND DONATION OF RS . 62,686/- IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME WAS NOT WILFU L IN THE CONTEXT WHEN RETURNED INCOME WAS OF RS. 33,74,6 00/- AND ASSESSED INCOME WAS RS. 35,50,870/-. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE L D. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING THE APPELLANT REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER ON ACCOUNT OF HOSPITALIZA TION OF APPELLANT COUNSEL AND PASSING EXPARTE ORDER FOR THE REASON THAT NONE ATTENDED. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD. C IT (A) ERRED IN NOT GRANTING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO TH E APPELLANT. 6. APPELLANT CRAVES FOR GRANT OF PERMISSION TO ADD, AMEND, MODIFY, DELETE OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT OR ANY TIME BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES A RE NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEA TED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSE E STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE EXPARTE WITHOUT AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASS ESSEE. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE F ILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, UNDER THE LAW, AFTER GIV ING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER UNDERTAKES ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE WILL FULLY COOPERATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING S AND ENSURED THAT HE WILL NOT TAKE ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. 3 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED UPON THE O RDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND STATED THAT THE SUFFICIENT OPPOR TUNITY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A), BUT ASSESS EE REMAINED NON- COOPERATIVE. THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED THAT THE IMPU GNED ORDER MAY BE UPHELD. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RE CORDS, ESPECIALLY THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE REQUEST MADE BY THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESS EE SEEMS TO BE GENUINE, BECAUSE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE L D. CIT(A) IS EXPARTE ORDER, WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTU NITY TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW AND AGA INST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUES IN DIS PUTE ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRES H, AFTER GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10/08/2016 . SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 10/08/2016 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES