CSAV Group Agencies (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4147/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 91432 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I1
• Next Hearing Date: 09-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARWINDER KAUR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 4147/D/2010 ASSTT.YEAR: 2006-07 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `I-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4147/DEL/2010 ASSTT.YEAR: 2006-07 CSAV GROUP AGENCIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., VS DY.COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PROPERTY NO.40, 1 ST FLOOR, CIRCLE 3(1), NEW DELHI. OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PHASE-III, NEW DELHI-110020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI NEERAJ JAIN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. P ARWINDER KAUR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 09.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20.7.2015 O R D E R PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL (DRP) BY WHICH THE DRP SUM MARILY REJECTED THE APPELLANTS OBJECTION TO THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 7.12.2009 PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) R/W SECTION 144C OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 FOR AY 2006- 07. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUN DS IN THIS APPEAL BUT THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEGAL GR OUND ALLEGING THE VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE CONTAINED IN GROUND N O.1 MAY KINDLY BE TAKEN UP ITA NO. 4147/D/2010 ASSTT.YEAR: 2006-07 2 FIRST. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT SHE HAS NO SERIOUS OB JECTION IF GROUND NO.1 IS TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION FIRST. GROUND NO. 1 OF THE ASS ESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL, NEW DELHI ('THE DRP') ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS BY SUMMARILY REJECTING THE APPELLANT'S OBJECTIONS TO THE DRAFT ORDER DATED DEC EMBER 7, 2009 PASSED BY THE LD. AO UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144C(1) OF THE ACT. THE DRP WHILE ISSUING D IRECTIONS UNDER SECTION 144C(5) OF THE ACT DID NOT ALLOW REAS ONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO FIGHT THE CASE ON M ERITS. THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DRP ARE ERRONEOUS AND PERVERSE ON FACTS. 2. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE D RP WHILE ISSUING DIRECTIONS TO THE AO U/S 144C(5) OF THE ACT DID NOT ALLOW REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND OBJECTIO NS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 7.12.2009 WERE DISMISSED AT THE THRESHOLD WITHOUT CONSIDERING AND ADJUDICATING THE OBJECTIONS AND SUB MISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, SAID DIRECTIONS OF THE DRP ARE AGAINST T HE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHICH ARE NOT ONLY ERRONEOUS BUT ALSO PERVERSE ON T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. LD. COUNSEL VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE DRP WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND CORRECT IN NOT FOLLOWING ANY PRINCIPLE OF NATUR AL JUSTICE AS THE OBJECTIONS OF THE AO TO THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER WERE DISMISSED WITHOUT ANY ADJUDICATION AND DELIBERATION ON MERITS AND THE DRP PASSED A CRY PTIC ORDER WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 3. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE DRP CONSIDERED THE OBJ ECTIONS OF THE AO TO THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER IN THE PRESENCE OF ASSES SEES REPRESENTATIVE SHRI RAJAN SACHDEVA AND SHRI VARUN KHANNA AND AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ITA NO. 4147/D/2010 ASSTT.YEAR: 2006-07 3 SUBMISSIONS AND OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE D RAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE DRP PASSED DIRECTIONS/ORDER U/S 144C OF THE ACT WHI CH CANNOT BE HELD AS PERVERSE OR AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTI CE. HOWEVER, LD. DR FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT THE DRP PASSED A VERY BRIEF ORDER WIT HOUT ANY DETAILED DELIBERATIONS ON THE OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE AS SESSEE AGAINST THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE DRP AS WELL AS ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 7.7.2010 PASSED IN PURSUANCE TO ORDER OF THE DRP, WE CLEARLY NOTE THAT THE DRP HAS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED AND ADJUDICATED THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH IS CLEARLY A VIOLATION OF PR INCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND HENCE, BRIEF AND CRYPTIC ORDER PASSED BY DRP CANNOT BE HELD AS SUSTAINABLE AND WE SET ASIDE THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY, THE ENTIRE CAS E IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF DRP FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AND FOR PASSING A DESCRI PTIVE ORDER U/S 144C OF THE ACT AFTER CONSIDERING AND ADJUDICATING OBJECTIONS O F THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER ALLOWING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING FOR THE ASSESSE E. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 1 OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AS INDIC ATED ABOVE. 5. SINCE WE HAVE RESTORED ENTIRE CASE TO THE FILE O F DRP FOR PASSING ORDER U/S 144C OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, OTHER GROUNDS AND ISSUE S RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND ACADEMIC AND WE DISMISS THE SAME WITHOUT ANY DELIBERATION ON MERITS AS INFRUCTUOUS. ITA NO. 4147/D/2010 ASSTT.YEAR: 2006-07 4 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE MANNER AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.7.2015. SD/- SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) (CHANDRAMOHAN GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 20TH JULY 2015 GS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T.(A) 4. C.I.T. 5. DR BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR