Bijay7 Laxmi Agrawal, Noida V. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 42/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9682 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: EKTA VISHNOI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 41 & 42/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2010-11 & 2012-13 BIJAY LAXMI AGRAWAL, VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HOUSE NO. 51, SECTOR-15A, GHAZIABAD NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH-201301 (PAN: AAJPA5946Q) ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY MS. EKTA VISHNOI, SR. DR. ORDER ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS AGAINST THE COMMO N IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.11.2018 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-IV, NEW DELHI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 & 2012-13. 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY THE LD. DR, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED HERE FOR T HE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. IN THESE CASES, NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE W AS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST, IN SPITE OF THE SAME, ASSES SEE, NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE, NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT . KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AN D THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS, I AM OF THE VIEW T HAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSUE NOTICE AGAIN AND A GAIN TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I AM DECIDING THE PRESENT APP EALS EXPARTE QUA ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 2 4. AFTER PERUSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT IS FOUND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EXPARTE IMPUGNED ORDER AGAINST THE ASSES SEE WITHOUT GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT(A). 6. I HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORDS ESPE CIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE REMAIN NON-COOPERATIVE BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A). BUT IN MY VIEW SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING FOR SUBSTANTIATIN G THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO TH E ASSESSEE, WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.11.2018 HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUS TICE, THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CI T(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 25 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A), NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI AR, ITAT