Sindh Seva Sansthan, Kanpur V. ITO-3(4), Kanpur

ITA 463/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0874 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S C AGARWAL S HRI C K
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.463/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.463/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 M/S SINDH SEVA SANSTHAN, 122/497, SINDHI COLONY, SHASTRI NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAAAS 3343 M VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-I, KANPUR DATED 24/05/2017 PERTAINING ASSESS MENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE NOTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER AS ACCORDING TO HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON T HE DATE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FROM THE O RDER OF CIT(A), IT IS NOT CLEAR AS TO HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO TH E ASSESSEE TO PURSUE HIS CASE. UNDER THESE FACTS WE FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPO RTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED T HE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE PROCE DURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLANT BY SHRI S. C. AGARWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 02/11/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 / 11/ 201 8 I.T.A. NO.463/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 2 CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD A T THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN THE NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO A PPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOU T GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW FRO M THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUF FICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH T HE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL A FRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE AS SESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT TO SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO-OPERATE WI TH LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/11 /2018) SD/. SD/. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:16/11/2018 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW