Ajit Singh, Shivpuri V. C.I.T., Gwalior

ITA 43/AGR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5711 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIPIN UPADHYAY
• Keywords: Revision of order; Principle of natural justice; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, ‘DB’: AGRA (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.43/AGR/2020 [Assessment Year: 2010-11] Ajit Singh, House No.150, Vaillage-Haatodh, Post, Kota, Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh-473551 Vs The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh-474011 PAN-CCNPS7470K Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Vipin Upadhyay, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Surendra Pal, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 14.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed u/s 263 of the Act of the Ld. Pr. CIT, Gwalior, dated 26.03.2020 pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The grounds of appeal reads as under:- 1. Because in any view, the impugned Order dt.26.03.2020 passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act setting aside the Assessment Order passed us 143(3)/147 dt. 22.12.2017 to be framed said to be on the so called issues is grossly arbitrary, unwarranted, wrong, illegal, bad in facts & law. 2. Because in any view, the so called illegible "Show Cause Notice dt.16.03.2020 reproduced in the impugned Order us 263 dt.26.03.2020 is without having quoted "DIN" (Document Identification Number) is invalid, void-ab-initio. The consequential order passed is vitiated and invalid accordingly. 3. Because in any view, the impugned Order passed us 263 dt. 26.03.2020 is against the principles of Audi Alteram Partem, and 2 ITA No.43/Agra/2020 has been passed without considering the Reply e-filed on 20.03.2020 vide Acknowledgement No. 20032013290073 in response to e-Notice dt. 19.03.2020 (vervatim of illegible Notice dt. 16.03.2020). 4. Because in any view, the impugned order us 263 is perverse, by ignoring and not appreciating the fact that the Assessment us 143(3)/147 dt. 22.12.2017 was passed by the AO with due Application of mind making queries and being satisfied after considering the queries. 5. Because in any view, the Assessment Order passed u/s 143(3)/147 dt. 22.12.2017 cannot be in any way said to be "erroneous as the directions are on mere surmises and conjectures to make enquiries that too without pointing out any error of facts or law. 6. Because in any view, the case laws has been mechanically referred in the impugned order us 263. 7. Because in any view, without prejudice to the aforesaid grounds, the order u/s 263 in any view is wrong, illegal, vitiated, without proper opportunity, bad in facts and law of the case. The Assessment Order passed u/s 143(3)/147 dt. 22.12.2017 cannot be said to be erroneous.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, the assessment u/s 143/147 of the Act was completed on 22.12.2017. The Pr. CIT invoked his jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act vide notice dated 16.03.2020. Subsequently, another notice dated 19.03.2020 was issued requiring the compliance on the very next date i.e. 20.03.2020. As per the Pr. CIT, this was also not complied with, therefore, the Pr. CIT passed order u/s 263 on 26.03.2020 holding that the assessment order is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and the order was set-aside to be framed afresh. 4. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the principal of natural justice has not complied with in this case. The assessee had not been given opportunity to rebut the notice in this regard. He 3 ITA No.43/Agra/2020 submitted that the first notice was issued on 16.03.2020 which did not have “DIN”(Document Identification Number), as such the same is invalid and void- ab-initio. Further, he submitted that the same is not properly legible. He further submitted that another notice was issued on 19.03.2020. The compliance was required on the very next day i.e. 20.03.2020. The ld. Counsel for the submitted that the assessee has replied even to that notice which has not been taken into account by the Ld. CIT. Hence, he pleaded that the assessee may be given an opportunity to represent his case before the Pr. CIT. The Ld. DR did not have any objection to the proposition canvassed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 6. Upon careful consideration, we note that the first notice which was issued on 16.03.2020 is invalid as it is without quoting DIN. The next notice dated 19.03.2020 gave only one day to respond and even then it is plea of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that reply was given, which has not been considered by the Ld. CIT. Accordingly, in our considered opinion, interest of justice will be served if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Ld. Pr. CIT to consider this issue afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We direct accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20.09.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Delhi; 20.09.2023 f{x~{tÜ? f{x~{tÜ?f{x~{tÜ? f{x~{tÜ? 4 ITA No.43/Agra/2020 Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi