Fidelity Infrastructure & Technology Pvt Ltd, New Delhi V. ITO WARD -9(2), New Delhi

ITA 4980/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6877 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: EKTA VISHNOI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

ITA 4980/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HONBLE VICE PRES IDENT ITA NO. 4980/DEL/2019 AY : 2010-11 M/S FIDELITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD., H-2, PUSHPANJALI FARMS, NEAR TO BHARAT PETROLEUM, DWARKA HIGHWAY, NEW DELHI-110061 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9 (2), KARNAL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI V. RAJA KUMAR, ADVOCAT E RESPONDENT BY: MS EKTA VISHNOI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.09.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.10.2019 ORDER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-3, NEW DELHI DATED 27.01.2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE OUTSET, WITHOUT REFERRING TO THE MERITS O F THE ADDITIONS ASSAILED IN THIS APPEAL, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE IN AN EX PARTE MANNER AND THAT DUE AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WA S DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE REFERRED TO PARA 4 TO 4. 2 OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) TO POINT OUT THAT THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX ITA 4980/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 2 PARTE ON A WRONG FOOTING. HE POINTED OUT THAT ON T HE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING, THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE COMPLIA NCE AND A LETTER WAS FURNISHED, SEEKING TIME OF THREE WEEKS. THE SAID R EQUEST WAS DENIED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) BY MAKING A WRONG OBS ERVATION THAT THE CA FIRM DID NOT FILE ITS AUTHORISATION LETTER /POWER O F ATTORNEY. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO A COMMUNICATION DATED 27.11.2018, ADDRESSED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), WHEREIN A REQUEST LETTER OF AUTHORISATION/POWER OF ATTORNEY W AS ENCLOSED. FOR THE AFORESAID REASON, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE WOULD BE SATISFIED IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 3. LEARNED DR APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE HAS NOT SER IOUSLY OPPOSED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL STANDS. I FIND THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) HAS PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE AP PEAL IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT COGENT REASONS. IN FACT, THE ASSE SSEE DULY COMPLIED WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING AND SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT WHICH HAS BEEN WRONGLY REJECTED ON A MISTAKEN PLEA THAT THE REQUISITE POWER OF ATTORNEY/ AUTHORISATION LETTER FROM THE APPELLANT WAS NOT FURNISHED. IN FACT, IN THE TABUL ATION PREPARED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) IN PARA 4 OF HIS ORDE R, WITH REFERENCE TO THE ITA 4980/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 3 FIRST DATE OF HEARING I.E. 24.12.2018, THE C.I.T.(A ) OBSERVED THAT ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME REPRESENTATIVE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 26.3.2019. OSTENSIBLY, ON AN EARLIER OCCASION, THE SAME REPRESENTATIVE HAS APPEARED AND SOUGHT FOR ADJOURNMENT, WHICH WAS GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), THEN ON A LATER DATE THE REQUEST CANNOT BE JUSTIFIABLY R EJECTED FOR WANT OF AUTHORISATION LETTER. IN ANY CASE, THE ASSESSEE HA S SHOWN THAT ON THE VERY FIRST DATE OF HEARING I.E. 24.12.2018, THE REQUEST FOR AD JOURNMENT WAS FURNISHED ALONG WITH LETTER OF AUTHORISATION. BE THAT AS IT MAY, I DEEM IT FIT TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) AND RESTORE TH E MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFT ER ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. THUS, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE ADDIT ION ASSAILED IN THIS APPEAL, THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) AS ABOVE. 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APP EAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.10.2019. SD/- (G.S. PANNU) VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 31ST OCTOBER, 2019 GS ITA 4980/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 4 COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS /PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P S/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER