Shri Anuj Dua, Zirakpur V. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

ITA 558/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8298 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SUDERSHAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH !, ' # , $ % & ' ( , )* # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM ./ ITA NO. 558/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI ANUJ DUA, SCO 20, MS ENCLAVE, OLD KALKA-AMBALA HIGHWAY, DHAKOLI, ZIRAKPUR, MOHALI. VS THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH. PAN /TAN NO: AFUPD0221P APPELLANT RESPONDENT ! ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VINEET KRISHAN, ADVOCATE ' ! REVENUE BY : SHRI ARVIND SUDERSHAN, SR.DR # $ % DATE OF HEARING : 26.09.2019 &'() % D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10.2019 )-/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH BY THE PRESENT APPEAL THE ASSESSEE ASSAILS THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 22.06.2018 OF CIT(A) -3 GURGAON PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VA RIOUS GROUNDS ON MERIT INCLUDING GROUND NO.S 2 & 3 ON WHI CH ARGUMENTS WERE ADVANCED BY THE PARTIES. ACCORDINGLY , FOR READY REFERENCE, GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : 2. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE ID. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRAVELLY ERRED IN NOT AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELL ANT. 3. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ID. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS CRYPTIC AND NON-SPEAKING ORDER. ITA 558 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO PARA 3.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT NONE OF THE NOTICES F IXING THE HEARING ON 08.09.2017, 09.05.2018 AND 15.06.2018 ST ATED TO HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE WERE RECEIVED. ACCO RDINGLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT FOR WANT OF NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED BEFORE THE CIT(A). 2.1 INVITING ATTENTION TO THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESS EE NOTICED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO. 5, IT WAS SUBMITTED, THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE NOTICES HAVE BE EN SENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE. SAID ADDR ESS, IT WAS SUBMITTED, WAS NEVER PROVIDED AS ALL FAMILY MEMBERS WERE WORKING, THUS, NOTICE EVEN IF SENT, WAS NOT RECEIVE D BY ANY RESPONSIBLE PERSON. INVITING ATTENTION TO COPY OF FORM NO. 35 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS AT WHICH THE NOTICES MAY BE SENT WHICH IS THE WORKING ADDRES S OF THE ASSESSEE: SHRI ANUJ DUA, DNA REALTORS, SCO : 252, 2 ND FLOOR, SECTOR 44-C, CHANDIGARH PIN-160047. 2.2 EVEN OTHERWISE, IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS NOT A SPEAKING ORDER AS IT MEREL Y UPHOLDS THE ORDER OF THE AO RELYING UPON DECISION O F THE ITA 558 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 3 OF 4 HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER 118 ITR 461 (S.C ). ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS HIS LIMITED PRAYER THAT THE ISS UE MAY BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) IN ORDER TO AFFORD T HE ASSESSEE AN EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HEARD. 3. THE LD. SR.DR ON CONSIDERING THE ADDRESS MADE AV AILABLE IN FORM NO. 35 AGREED THAT NOTICES MAY HAVE BEEN SE NT TO A DIFFERENT ADDRESS. AS THERE IS NO DISCUSSION IN THE ORDER AS TO HOW THESE NOTICES WERE SENT AND WHETHER THEY WER E RECEIVED BY ANY PARTY, HE COULD MAKE NO SUBMISSION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD EFFECTIVELY DEMONSTRATES TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT HEARD. IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRAYER OF THE PARTIES BEFORE THE BENCH, WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE ASPECT OF NON-REPRESENTATION, WE HAVING CONSIDERED COPY OF FO RM NO. 35 AVAILABLE ON RECORD, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). THU S, IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, ACCEPTING THE ORAL UNDERTAKING OF T HE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDI NGS BEFORE THE CIT(A) , THE ISSUES ARE REMANDED TO THE LD. CIT (A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WI TH LAW AFTER PROVIDING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTERESTS IS A DVISED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS FULLY AND FAIRLY AND NOT ABUSE ITA 558 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 4 OF 4 THE TRUST REPOSED AS FAILING WHICH, IT IS MADE CLEA R THAT CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SAID ORDER WAS PRONO UNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH OCTOBER,2019. SD/- SD/- ( $ % & ' ( ) ( ! ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SINGH) )* #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM '+ ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. # / / CIT 4. # / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , % 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7$ / GUARD FILE '+ # / BY ORDER, 8 ' / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR