Arun Nayyar, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4971/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6998 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-FRIDAY-C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 4 971 /DEL/20 1 4 A.Y. : 20 10 - 11 ARUN NAYYAR, C-3/A/137B, JANAK PURI, NEW DELHI 110 058 (PAN: AABPN5480A) VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 23, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MR. ROHIT GARG, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MR. ATIQ AHMED, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 24.06.2016 DATE OF ORDER : 01-07-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER DATED 30.6.2014 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XII, NEW DE LHI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AR E NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NO NEED TO RE PEAT HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.4971/DEL/2014 2 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSE E STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN EXPARTE ORDER WITHOU T HEARING THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURA L JUSTICE. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL ON EXACTLY SIMILAR GR OUNDS IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSTT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2 009-10 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.10.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 4965 TO 4970 /DEL/2014 HAS SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK THE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER AND GRANT REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HE FILE D THE COPY OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 30.10.2015 FOR READY REFERENC E. ACCORDINGLY, HE REQUESTED THAT THE SIMILAR ORDER MAY PLEASE BE PASS ED IN THIS APPEAL ALSO. 4. ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE , LD. DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELE VANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH ME, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER WH ICH HAS BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE WITHOUT GIVING S UFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. I FIND CONSIDERABLE C OGENCY IN THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ON EXACTLY SIMILAR ISSUE, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN SET ASIDE AND RESTO RED BACK BY THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSTT YEARS 20 04-05 TO ITA NO.4971/DEL/2014 3 2009-10 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.10.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 4965 TO 4970/DEL/2014 FOR PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER AND GIV E ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. THE REL EVANT PORTION OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 4.1. THE DECISION CANNOT BE UPHELD AS IT IS BASED ON AN INCORRECT APPRECIATION OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE. SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SETS OUT THE PROCEDURE WHICH THE CIT(A) IS REQUIRED TO FOL LOW IN APPEAL. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PRESENT PROCEEDIN GS, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO SET OUT SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT:- 250. '(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. (6A) ' ITA NO.4971/DEL/2014 4 4.1 A PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS UNDER CHALLENGE SHOWS THA T WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT FOLLOWED THESE MANDATORY PROVISIONS. WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUES THE CIT(A) IS FIRST SUPPOSED TO SET OUT THE P OINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND THEREAFTER THE REASONS FOR THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN HAVE TO BE BROUGHT ON RECORD. IN T HE ABSENCE OF THIS REQUISITE EXERCISE THE ORDER CANNOT BE UPHELD. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS IN EACH OF THESE APPEALS ARE SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BAC K TO THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT A REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES. 5.1 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE COORDINATE BENCH DECIS ION, AS AFORESAID, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS SET ASIDE AND RESTOR ED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO PASS A SP EAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT ASSESSEE SH OULD GRANTED REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.4971/DEL/2014 5 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01-07-2016. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER SR BHATNAGAR DATE: 01-07-2016 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES