M/s. A.R.Foundation Pvt.Ltd, CHENNAI V. The Income Tax Officer, CHENNAI

ITA 506/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61147 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR YOGE SH KAMATHJCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.506/MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) M/S. A.R.FOUNDATION PVT. LTD., C/O. SHRI S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE NEW NO.14 OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI-600 020. PAN:AAFCA1661B VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD-1(1), CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : DR. YOGE SH KAMATH,JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 31 ST MAY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 8 TH JUNE, 2012 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-III, CHENNAI DATED 07.12.2011. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS NOT INTEN TIONAL OR WILLFUL. HE SUBMITTED THAT IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS GIV EN, HE WOULD APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO PRESENT HIS CASE. ITA NO.506/MDS/ 2012 2 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, D.R. SUBMITTED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE, NO ONE APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO DEFEND THE CASE ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, HE HAS NO OBJECTION, IF THE MATT ER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A). A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER SHOWS THAT ON FI VE OCCASIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAD SOUGHT TIME CITING SIMI LAR REASONS. THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY FOL LOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HIGH COURT/TRIBUNAL IN THE CAS ES OF - I) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT., 223 IT R 480(MP) II) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITR 320(DE L). EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE CIT(A) EXERCISES QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION AND THEREFORE, IS DUTY BOUND TO DEAL WITH EACH SUBMISSI ON OF THE ASSESSEE AND GIVES REASONS FOR EITHER ACCEPTING OR REJECTING THE SAME, SO THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN ITS CASE BEFORE THE HIGHER FORUM. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE DIVISION ITA NO.506/MDS/ 2012 3 BENCH OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F VODAFONE ESSR LTD. VS. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL REP ORTED AS (2011) 196 TAXMAN 423(DEL) HELD THAT BE IT NOTED, WHEN A QUASI-JUDICIAL AUTHORITY DEALS WITH A LIS, IT IS OB LIGATORY ON ITS PART TO ASCRIBE COGENT AND GERMANE REASONS AS THE S AME IS THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE MATTER. AND FURTHER, THE SAME ALSO FACILITATES APPRECIATION, WHEN THE ORDER IS CALLED IN QUESTION BEFORE THE SUPERIOR FORUM . IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED BACK TO THE CIT(A) FOR DE CIDING IT AFRESH ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES. O RDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 8 TH OF JUNE, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( N.S. SAINI ) (VIKAS AWASTHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 8 TH JUNE, 2012. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F .