Smt. Sanno Devi, Uttar Pradesh V. ITO, Noida

ITA 5838/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0040 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAKASH DUBEY
• Assessee Lawyers: K P GARG
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

I.T.A.NO.5838/DEL/2016 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . . /. I.T.A NO.5838/DEL/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SANNO DEVI W/O LATE SH. KANCHI MAL, R/O VILL.-SURAJPUR, DISTT., G.B. NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH. VS. ITO WARD 3(3) GHAZIABAD. PAN NO. AHQPD2801B APPELLANT / RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY SH. K.P. GARG, CA /REVENUE BY SH. PRAKASH DUBEY, SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING: 1 7 .03.2021 /PRONOUNCEMENT ON 1 7 .03.2021 /O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-NOIDA DATED 29.07.2016 FOR AY 2008-09. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS FIXED FOR 30.05.2016, HOWEVER, THERE WERE NO AP PEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE. AGAIN APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR 2 3.06.2016, AGAIN THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT THEREAF TER, REQUEST WAS MADE FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND OF OCCUPATION OF COUNSEL WHICH WAS REJECTED AND APPEAL OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED. I.T.A.NO.5838/DEL/2016 2 3. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 182 DAYS. CONSIDER ING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS ILL, THEREFORE, APP EAL COULD NOT BE FILED, THEREFORE, NOMINAL DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS CO NDONED. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LD. CIT(A)-NOIDA. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHICH WAS NOT CONSIDERED FAVOURABLE BECAUSE ON THE EARLIE R TWO DATES, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IT IS N OT CLARIFIED IN THE MATTER WHETHER ON EARLIER OCCASIONS, NOTICES HAVE B EEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. SINCE, REQUEST WAS MADE LASTLY FOR ADJOU RNMENT ON THE GROUND OF OCCUPATION OF THE COUNSEL, THEREFORE, SUCH REASO NS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE APPEAL SHOU LD HAVE BEEN ADJOURNED. 5. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT NO REASONABL E SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD. CI T(A) TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THUS, CANNOT BE SUSTAIN ED IN LAW. WE, ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTO RE THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A)-NOIDA WITH DIREC TION TO RE-DECIDE THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE ON MERITS BY GIVING REASONABLE S UFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/03/2021 SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17.03.2021 * KAVITA ARORA, SR. P.S. I.T.A.NO.5838/DEL/2016 3 COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A) / ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT: DELHI BENCHES-DELHI