M/s. U.B. Global Corporation P. Ltd., Bangalore V. DCIT,

ITA 518/BANG/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0583 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LAKSHMI HANDE PURI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 263; 63

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBE R AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.518/BANG/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 M/S. U.B. GLOBAL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., [SINCE AMALGAMATED WITH UNITED BREWERIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,] UB TOWERS, UB CITY, 24, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001. : APPELLANT VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 12(5), BANGALORE. : RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. PARTHASARATHI RESPONDENT BY : SMT. LAKSHMI HANDE PURI O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 12.2.2009. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE AT HAND IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE VIDE TRIBU NALS ORDER IN ITA NO.655/B/08 FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. IN THIS REGARD THE LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT THE FACTS OF THE PRESEN T CASE ARE DIFFERENT TO THE ITA NO.518/B/09 PAGE 2 OF 3 ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04. HE POINT ED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 263 DATED 15.2. 08 BY CIT-III HAS RESPONDED VIDE ITS REPLY DATED 20.2.08, COPY OF SAM E HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD BY WAY OF PAPERBOOK AT SL.NO.2 AND 3 AND IT WAS CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL. FURTHER IT WAS SUBMITTED THA T THE REPLY DATED 20.2.08 HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S. 263. TO THIS, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT SHOW CAUSE NOTICE I S DATED 11.12.08 WHICH WAS NOT RESPONDED BY THE ASSESSEE AT ANY POINT OF T IME IN SPITE OF OPPORTUNITY. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. AR SUBMITTE D THAT HE HAS NOT RECEIVED THE SAID LETTER. 4. THE FACTS EMERGING FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION ARE THAT ACCORDING TO THE LD. DR, SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 11.12.08 U/S. 2 63 HAS NOT BEEN RESPONDED BY THE ASSESSEE; WHILE ACCORDING TO THE L D. AR, NOTICE DATED 15.2.08 BY THE CIT HAS BEEN RESPONDED BY THE ASSESS EE VIDE ITS REPLY DATED 20.2.08 AND THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED. TO AVOID THIS CONTROVERSY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE CIT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AT HAND AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE, BECAUSE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING IS THE ESSENCE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WHICH SEEMS TO BE MI SSING IN THIS CASE. SINCE WE ARE RESTORING THE MATTER ON PRELIMINARY ISSUE, SO WE REFRAIN TO COMMENT ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE AT HAND. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.518/B/09 PAGE 3 OF 3 PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009. SD/- SD/- ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 30 TH OCTOBER, 2009. DS/- COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE (1+1) BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, BANGALORE.