Sh. Vishal Singh, Chandigarh V. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

ITA 568/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5014 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 568/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SH. VISHAL SINGH, VS. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), H.NO.502, SECTOR 10-C, CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO.ADYPS1467N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. VINEET KRISHAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDERKANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 16.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.08.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.07.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, GURGAON [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SU BMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE HAD CHANGED, THEREFORE, THE NOTICE OF DATE OF HEARING COULD NOT BE SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DATE OF HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE LD. CIT( A) HAS HIMSELF NOTED TO 2 ITA NO.568-C-2018- SHRI NIRANKAR SINGH, MOHALI THIS EFFECT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT APPARENTLY T HE APPELLANT HAD SHIFTED FROM HIS ORIGINAL RESIDENCE WITHOUT INFORMING ABOU T THE CHANGE OF RESIDENCE TO THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A). THE LD. AR HAS SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE INADVERTENTLY COULD NOT INFORM THE CIT(A) ABOUT THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS. THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS UNINTENTIONAL. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN T HIS APPEAL IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE ON THIS ISSUE. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN A C HANCE TO PUT HIS CASE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS PER THE FACTS PUT BEFORE US, IN OUR VIEW, THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS NOT INTENTIONAL, BUT OWING TO THE NON-R ECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF DATE OF HEARING. FURTHER, IN OUR VIEW, THE INTEREST OF J USTICE WILL BE WELL SERVED IF THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CA SE PROPERLY BEFORE CIT(A). HENCE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS HEREBY SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH ON MERITS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSES SEE WILL PROMPTLY APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A), AS AND WHEN CALLED FOR, AND WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE IN UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 01. 08.2018 RKK 3 ITA NO.568-C-2018- SHRI NIRANKAR SINGH, MOHALI COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR