1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.605 & 606/LKW/12 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004 - 05 & 08 - 09 DISTRICT COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. 30 - D, O BLOCK, KIDWAI NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAAAD2431M VS. A.C.I.T. - 1, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI AJAY KUMAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 25/02/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 8 / 02/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A) - II, KANPUR BOTH DATED 20/09/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 AND 2008 - 09. BOTH THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT BOTH THESE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A) ARE PASSED BY HIM EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITT ED THAT FIRST NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON 09/07/2012 ASKING FOR COMPLIANCE ON 18/07/2012. ON THIS DATE , THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT AND THE SAME WAS GRANTED AND HEARING WAS FIXED 2 ON 23/07/2012 BUT BECAUSE OF UNAVOIDABLE REASONS, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE COMPLIANCE ON THIS DATE. REGARDING THE NOTING OF LEARNED CIT(A) THAT FRESH NOTICE DATED 31/07/2012 WAS ISSUED FOR ASSESSEES COMPLIANCE ON 13/08/2012 , H E SUBMITTED THAT THIS NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED T HAT UNDER THESE FACTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IF THIS OPPORTUNITY IS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE WILL MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE CIT(A). 3. AS AGAINST THIS, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE PROVIDED WITH MORE OPPORTUNITY. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, ALTHOUGH THREE OPPORTUNITIES WERE PROVIDED BY CIT(A) TO APPEAR ON 18/07/2012, 23/07/2012 AND 13/08/2012 BUT STILL WE FEEL THAT SINCE ADJOURNMENT WAS REQUESTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE FIRST DATE AND IT IS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LAST NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FEEL THAT ONLY ONE EFFECTIVE NON COMPLIANCE IS THERE AND HENCE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, NO PREJUDICE WILL BE CAUSED TO THE REVENUE IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) FOR BOTH THE YEARS AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEAR D TO BOTH THE SIDES . WE WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS TIME , THE ASSESSEE SHOULD COOPERATE WITH THE CIT(A) AND SHOULD NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT COMPELLING REASONS. IN VIEW OF OUR 3 DECISION TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO CIT(A) FOR FRESH DECISION, NO ADJ UDICATION IS CALLED FOR ON THE MERIT OF THE ISSUE, WHICH IS DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS PER VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE US IN BOTH THE YEARS. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 8 /02/2014. *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR