PRABHA VIKRAM SINHA, MUMBAI V. ITO 16(1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5381/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3491 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DIPAK RIPOTE
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ TOPRANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH I , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER IT A NO. 5381 /MUM/20 15 : (A.Y : 20 11 - 12 ) SMT. PRABHA VIKRAM SINHA C/O DEEPAN PARIKH, 101, B WING, SHANTI NIWAS, NATWAR NAGAR, ROAD NO. 5, JOGESHWARI (E), MUMBAI 400 060 ( APPELLANT ) PAN : ALSPS5725P VS. ITO - 16(1)(3), MUMBAI (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PANKAJ TOPRANI & KRUPA TOPRANI REVENUE BY : SHRI DIPAK RIPOTE DATE OF HEARING : 20 /0 7 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 /0 8 /2016 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU , AM : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 4 , MUMBAI DATED 05 . 08 .20 15 , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11 - 12 , WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 14 . 03 .20 14 UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE FIRST AND THE FOREMOST PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED I N DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE WITHOUT GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE . 2 SMT. PRABHA VIKRAM SINHA ITA NO. 5381 /MUM/2015 3. IN BRIEF, THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHOSE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 WAS SUBJECT TO SCRUTIN Y ASSESSMENT WHEREBY THE TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.1,22,65,815/ - AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS.16,96,410/ - . IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, VARIOUS ADDITIONS WERE MADE TO THE RETURNED INCOME, WHICH WERE CHALLENGED IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL , AS ACCORDING TO HIM , ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL BECAUSE NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF ISSUANCE OF NOTICE OF HEARING AND EVEN ON MERITS HE HAS UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ALL ISSUES . 4. BEFORE US, THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT ALLOWING APPROPRIATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT CIT(A) ISSUED THE NOTICE OF HEARING ONLY ONCE , AS CAN BE SEEN F ROM PARA 1 OF THE ORDER, BUT DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS IT COULD NOT REACH THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED REPRESEN TATIVE ALSO REFERRED TO THE DETAILED STATEMENT OF FACTS, WHICH WAS ANNEXED TO THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), AND CONTENDED THAT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNJUSTLY DISMISSED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WOULD BE SATISFIED FOR THE PRESENT , IF THE APPEAL IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE FACTUAL MATRIX BROUGHT OUT BY THE LEARNED 3 SMT. PRABHA VIKRAM SINHA ITA NO. 5381 /MUM/2015 REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE A ND HAS ALSO NOT OPPOSED THE PLEA FOR REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. NO DOUBT, CIT(A) HAD ISSUED A NOTICE OF HEARING , WHICH WAS NOT RESPONDED BY THE ASSESSEE, BUT IT APPEARS FROM RECORD THAT THE CIT(A) ISSUED A SINGLE NOTICE AND THEREAFTER NO EFFORT WAS MADE EITHER THROUGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR OTHERWISE TO OBTAIN THE CHANGED ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE CONSCIOUS THAT THE PRIMARY DUTY WAS OF THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE INFORMED T HE CIT(A) ABOUT ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS. BE THAT AS IT MAY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THAT THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WHO SHALL RE - ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM AFTER ALLOWING ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND AS PER LAW. THEREFORE, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE VARIOUS ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT(A), WE SET - ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A ) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH AS PER LAW AS PER OUR AFORESAID DIRECTIONS. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED, AS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 6 T H AUGUST, 2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( G.S. PANNU ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 2 6 T H AUGUST , 2016 * SSL * 4 SMT. PRABHA VIKRAM SINHA ITA NO. 5381 /MUM/2015 COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, I BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI