Sasa Foods Pvt. Ltd., Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 586/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3017 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIT LAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER ITA NO. 586/DEL/2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2001 - 02 SASA FOODS PVT. LTD., C - 16/2, NEW GOV INDPURA PARWANA ROAD, PREET VIHAR, DELHI - 110051 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 7(3 ), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A ABCS5846A ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. AMRIT LAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 18 .0 5 .201 7 DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 22 .05 .201 7 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.12 .2016 OF LD. CIT(A) - 1 7 , NEW DELHI . 2. NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. WE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL IS DECIDED AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 3 . THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE DENIAL OF PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY THE LD. CIT(A). 4 . THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY RETURN IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 ISSUED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ITA NO . 586 /DEL /201 7 SASA FOODS PVT. LTD. 2 INVESTIGATION WING. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED EX - PARTE U/S 144 OF THE INCOME - TAX A CT AT AN INCOME OF RS.30,00,000/ - BY OBSERVING THAT THE INVESTIGATION WING REPORTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN CREDIT OF RS.30,00,000/ - AND NO RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED. 5 . BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO PASS ED THE EX - PARTE ORDER AND SUSTAINED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 6 . NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICE S U/S 250 OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED ON VARIOUS DATES AND THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE O N THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, HE DID NOT MENTION THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . WE, THEREFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCI PLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW , AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ITA NO . 586 /DEL /201 7 SASA FOODS PVT. LTD. 3 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22 /05 /2017 ) SD/ - (N. K. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DAT ED: 22 /05 /2017 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR