Divya Shyamaprakash Vaidya, Surat, Sura V. Income Tax Officer (Jurisdictional AO) Ward-1(3)(1), Surat

ITA 53/SRT/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3314 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 53/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year 2020-21) (Hybrid hearing) Divya Shyamaprakash Vaidya, Flat No. 832, block Q, Ashirwad Palace, Nr. Jamnanagar Bus Stand, Bhatar Road, Surat, 395007. (Gujarat). PAN No. AEYPV 7606 P Vs. I.T.O., Ward 1(3)(1), Surat. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri Sapnesh Sheth, C.A. Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Appeal instituted on 18/01/2024 Date of hearing 21/03/2024 Date of pronouncement 21/03/2024 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 18/12/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in passing ex parte order although assessee sought adjournment twice on 13/07/2023 and 25/10/2023. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in ITA No. 53/Srt/2024 Divya Shyamaprakash Vaidya Vs ITO 2 confirming the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the claim of interest on OD account of Rs. 9,35,634/- u/s 57 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. It is therefore prayed that above addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted.” 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that the ld. CIT(A) passed the order in ex parte proceedings without giving fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It is not the case of ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has not made compliance of his various notices, rather in para 4.1 of impugned order, he has duly recorded that the assessee sought adjournment. Last notice was issued on 08/11/2023 fixing the date of hearing on 20/11/2023. Till 20/11/2023, the assessee could not furnish the requisite submission which resulted passing the impugned order by the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by Assessing Officer in the assessment order. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that he has good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee to explained his case before ld CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the orders of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee has not made submission despite giving more than sufficient opportunity as recorded in para 4.1 of impugned order. The assessee does not deserve any ITA No. 53/Srt/2024 Divya Shyamaprakash Vaidya Vs ITO 3 further round of appeal for seeking restoration of appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A). 4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. We find that the assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 20/10/2022. It is a matter of record that the ld. CIT(A) issued three notices to the assessee for furnishing requisite submission. We further find that on two occasions, the assessee sought adjournment. It is not the case of ld. CIT(A) that the assessee always remained non-complied. Considering the fact that the additions were confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) in an ex parte proceeding and substantial right of assessee are involved in the present appeal, therefore, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, in our view, the assessee deserve one more opportunity to explain all the facts leading of various additions before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, entire appeal is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the issue afresh in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the ld. CIT(A) shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future and not to cause further delay and seek adjournment without any valid reason and to furnish all the details and his submissions and evidences on various grounds of appeal raised by him, ITA No. 53/Srt/2024 Divya Shyamaprakash Vaidya Vs ITO 4 as soon as possible, if so desired. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order announced in open court 21 st March, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat, Dated: 21/03/2024 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Surat