Hasur Himalayan Products Private Limited, Delhi V. ITO, Bilaspur

ITA 443/CHANDI/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5132 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-07-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Assessment record

Judgement Text

आयकरअपील यअ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ,च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.4 4 2 & 4 4 3 / C H D / 2 0 2 3 नधा रणवष / Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 Hasur HimalayanProducts Private Limited, NH-88,Village – Delag, NichliBhatter Tehsil, Sadar, Bilaspur 175121 Vs. बनाम The ITO, Bilaspur थायीलेखासं./PAN No.AABCH6621C अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent ( HYBRID HEARING ) नध रतीक ओरसे/Assessee by : ShriMukal Gupta, Advocate राज वक ओरसे/ Revenue by : Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr.DR स ु नवाईक तार#ख/Date of Hearing : 23.11.2023 उदघोषणाक तार#ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain, Vice President: Both the appeals filed by the Assessee are against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, each dated 27.05.2023, for the Assessment Years 2011- 12 and 2012-13 respectively. 442 & 443-Chd-2023-M/s Hasur Himalayan Products Private Limited, Bilaspur 2 2. In both the cases, an adjournment application has been filed by the ld. Authorized Representatives (‘AR’) of the Assessee requesting that since the Assessee is out of India, due to which the Counsel would not be able to represent the above said matters, the matters be adjourned to any other convenient date. From the records, we find that the matter can be proceeded with in the absence of the Assessee, we are proceeding to pass this order. Thus, the adjournment application filed by the Assessee is rejected. 3. We have heard the parties and have perused the material on record. 4 At the outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the Assessee thatthe sole grievance of the Assessee in these appeals is that the ld. CIT(A) has concluded the proceedings by passing an ex-parte order without proper perusal of the assessment records and dismissed the appeals of the Assessee by sustaining the additions and upholding the orders passed by the Assessing Officer; that the Assessing Officer has also erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act and that the ld. CIT(A)without considering the facts of the case and without providing an opportunigy of being heard to the Assessee, in both the appeals, passed the impugned ex-parte orders which are against the principles of natural justice, totally unfair, arbitrary and 442 & 443-Chd-2023-M/s Hasur Himalayan Products Private Limited, Bilaspur 3 unjustified. It has further been submitted that the Assessee has a fair case on merits and, therefore, prayed that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the Assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing of the appeals before the Assessing Officer and the appeals be directed to be decided on merits. 5. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. Heard. We have gone through the orders of the ld. CIT (A) and find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appealsof the Assessee ex-parte by merely sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer and upheld the orderspassed by the Assessing Officer, without considering the material available on record, and also without going into the merits of the cases. As such, an opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the Assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. VeluPalandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit. 7. The ld. D.R., though, has placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below, but has no objection if the matter in both the appeals is remanded to the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. 442 & 443-Chd-2023-M/s Hasur Himalayan Products Private Limited, Bilaspur 4 8. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the matter, in both appeals, is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer, to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the Assessing Officer.All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 9. In the result, for statistical purposes, both the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29.11.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member Vice President “आर.के.” आदेशक त)ल*पअ+े*षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent 3. आयकरआय ु 0त/ CIT 4. *वभागीय त न4ध, आयकरअपील#यआ4धकरण, च6डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar