M/s Zaz Mustang, Kanpur V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur

ITA 493/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 49323714 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 13-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R K RAM
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI, SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.493/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 DCIT-I KANPUR VS M/S ZAZ MUSTANG C/O ZAZ TANNERY COMPOUND 150FT ROAD JAJMAU, KANPUR PAN AAAFZ 1621 J (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) NONE APPELLANT BY SHRI R.K. RAM, DR RESPONDENT BY 25/08/2015 DATE OF HEARING 24 /0 9 /2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, KANPUR DATED 09.03.2015 FOR THE AY 2004-05. 2. THE GROUNDS NO. 1 TO 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E AS UNDER: 1. HONOURABLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS IN FACT BY PASSING OF EXPAR TE ORDER AND BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT PROVIDING REAS ONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. 2. HONOURABLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT COUNSEL OF THE A PPELLANT HAS WENT MUMBAI FOR CHECKUP AND CONSULTATION AFTER POST SPINAL SURGERY HENCE COULD NOT ATTEND ON DATE OF HE ARING. 3. HONOURABLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS BY DISMISS ING APPEAL AND CONFIRMING ADDITIONS BASED ON AVERMENT MADE AND CONCLUSION DRAWN AND MECHANICALLY FOLLOWING WITHOUT 2 VERIFYING THE FACTS AND ADJUDICATING ISSUES INVOLVE D IN THE APPEAL. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, IN SPI TE OF NOTICE AND HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX- PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. LD. DR OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 2 OF HIS ORDER THAT VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE PROVID ED, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THES E GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DR OF T HE REVENUE. WE FIND THAT IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL THAT THE COUNSELOR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS GONE TO MUMBAI FOR CH ECKUP AND CONSULTATION AFTER POST SPINAL SURGERY AND FOR THIS REASON, HE C OULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT IS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A ) IN PARA 2 OF HIS ORDER THAT ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE ON 21.1 0.2013 BUT THEREAFTER, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE, ALTHOUGH HE AGAIN FIXED TW O DATES FOR HEARING I.E. 23.01.2015 AND 27.02.2015. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING ITS CONTENTION THAT THE COUNSELO R OF THE ASSESSEE WAS AWAY IN MUMBAI FOR MEDICAL CHECKUP AND CONSULTATION IN VIEW OF SPINAL SURGERY BUT WE FEEL THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE , ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRESENTING HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING REASONA BLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE SIDES. 5. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION WITH REGARD TO GROUNDS N O. 1 TO 3 IN ABOVE PARA, NO ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR AT THIS STAGE REGARDI NG OTHER GROUNDS ON MERIT RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DAT E MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (A.K. G ARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 24/09/2015 AKS 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 ASSTT. REGISTRAR