M/s Shree Nirman Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, WD-5(3), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 518/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1647 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KALYAN NATH
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS SIKHA AGARWAL ACA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, B , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 518 / KOL / 2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2006-07 M/S SHREE NIRMAN LTD. 4, SCINDIA HOUSE, NEW DELHI-110001 [ AADCS 6516 P ] V/S . ITO WARD-5(3), KOLKATA AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-69 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT MRS. SIKHA AGARWAL, ACA /BY RESPONDENT SHRI KALYAN NATH, ADDL-CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 22-08-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25-08-2017 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, KOLKATA DAT ED 16.01.2015. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ACIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA U/ S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 15.12.2008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. MRS. SIKHA AGARWAL, LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE A PPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND SHRI KALYAN NATH LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. ITA NO.518/KOL/2015 A.Y. 2006-07 M/S SHREE NIRMAN LTD. VS. ITO WD-5(3) KOL. PAGE 2 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FOR THE HEARING BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR ALL THE TIME BEFORE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE , THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED BY LD. CIT(A) AS EX PARTE ON 16.01.2015. 3. AGAINST THE IMPUGNED EX PARTE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE BEFORE US SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CHANGED TO NEW DELHI. THEREFORE, N O NOTICE OF HEARING SENT BY THE OFFICE OF LD. CIT(A) WAS RECEIVED BY IT. THU S, THE LD CIT(A) DUE TO NON- COMPLIANCE OF THE ASSESSEE PASSED THE EX PARTE ORDER. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US FAIRLY CONCEDED THE FACT THAT TH E NEW ADDRESS WAS NOT COMMUNICATED TO THE LD CIT(A) INADVERTENTLY. THE LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF HER CLAIM FOR THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS O F THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE AY 2008-09 WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE BEFORE US PRAYED TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) FOR FRE SH ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD THE DR AGREED TO THE SUBM ISSION OF LD. AR IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A). 5. ON PERUSAL OF IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER, WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) AFFIRMED THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER EX PARTE WITHOUT MENTIONING ANY REASON FOR CONFIRMING THE SAME ON MERITS. THE PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT REQUIRE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEAL) TO DISPOS E OF THE APPEAL IN WRITING WITH REASONING. BUT WE FIND FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF AO WITHOUT DECIDING THE SAME ON MERIT. WE ALSO FIND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY LD. CIT(A) SH OULD HAVE GIVEN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM TO EXPLAIN ITS POINTS OF CONTENTIONS. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY THE MATTER SHOULD REMIT TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE ON MERIT AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD TO ITA NO.518/KOL/2015 A.Y. 2006-07 M/S SHREE NIRMAN LTD. VS. ITO WD-5(3) KOL. PAGE 3 ASSESSEE. IT IS NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE S HOULD CO-OPERATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING AS AND WHEN CALLED BY LD. CIT( A). HENCE, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PU RPOSE. 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 25/ 08/2017 SD/- SD/- ($%&) ( %&) (N.V.VASUDEVAN) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S (%)*- 25 / 08 /201 7 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-M/S SREE NIRMAN LTD. 4, SCINDIA HOUSE, N EW DELHI-110001 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WARD-5(3) AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOW RINGHEE SQ.,KOLKATA-69 3.)2)3 4 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 4- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.789$$3 , 3 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.9;<=> / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ %, /TRUE COPY/ SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/DDO 3 ,