Sh. Onkar Soni, Mandi V. JCIT, Mandi

ITA 539/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6995 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A K JINDAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 539/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SHRI ONKAR SAINI, VS. THE JCIT, VILLAGE KHANOT, MANDI RANGE, PO BARIN, MANDI. TEHSIL BALDWARA, DISTT. MANDI. PAN NO. ALFOS2375E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K.JINDAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.08.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILIN G THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 27.01.2017 OF CIT (APPEALS ) PALAMPUR PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER PASSED BY JCIT U/S. 271-D IMPOSING PENALTY THOUGH NO PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143 (3), THUS THE ORDER PASSED IS VOID AB-INITIO AND NEEDS TO BE QUASHED. 2. A) THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AN D FACTS OF THE CASE IN UPHOLDING THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S. 271-D AMOUNTING TO RS. 7,0 0,000/- WHICH IS HIGHLY UNJUSTIFIED AND UNCALLED FOR. B) THAT THE APPELLANT DISPUTES THE QUANTUM OF P ENALTY IMPOSED. 2. THE LD. AR SHRI A.K.JINDAL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE PEN ALTY HAS BEEN WRONGLY IMPOSED. THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IT WAS SUBMITTED, IS AN EX-PA RTE ORDER. ADDRESSING THE REASONS FOR NON-REPRESENTATION BEFORE TH E CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR STATING THAT THE ADDRESS PROVID ED IN THE APPEAL IS OF M/S VISHWA SERVICE STATION, VPO PANARSA, DISTT. MANDI (HP), H OWEVER, THE SAID SERVICE STATION HAS BEEN SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE, ACCO RDINGLY, NOTICES WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN SENT, HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVED AS TH E ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE GOOD RELATIONS WITH THE PERSON WHO PURCHASED IT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS PROVIDED IN FORM NO. 36 IS THE CORRECT ADDRE SS WHERE ASSESSEE CAN BE SERVED NOTICE. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AS ARGUED AFTER HEARING LD. SR.DR, IT IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER BACK TO THE FILE O F THE ITA 539/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2007-08 PAGE 2 OF 2 LD. CIT(A) IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIATE JUSTICE AS ADMITTE DLY THE ASSESSEE FOR REASONS BEYOND HIS CONTROL HAS REMAINED UNREPRESENTED BEFORE THE CIT(A). AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL PA RTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A) FULLY AND FAIRLY AS IN THE EV ENTUALITY OF ABUSE OF THE OPPORTUNITY SO PROVIDED THE CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE IM PUGNED ORDER, ACCORDINGLY, IS SET ASIDE IN TERMS OF THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS, BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURP OSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH AUGUST,2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.