Rajvanti Devi , Sonipat V. ITO WARD -5, Sonipat

ITA 6099/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7278 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.6099/DEL/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) RAJVANTI DEVI R/O LIWAN SONIPAT W/O PHOOL KUMAR 96, R MODEL TOWN, SONIPAT. PAN-AWVPD 5068N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, SONIPAT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE (APPLICATION REJECTED) RESPONDENT BY SH. R.K. GUPTA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 16.08.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07/09/2021 HEARING CONDUCT ED VIA WEBEX ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE W HEREIN THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2019 OF CIT(A) -6, ROHTAK PERTAINING TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR IS ASSAILED ON VARIOUS GROU NDS INCLUDING LACK OF PROPER NOTICE AND ALSO ON THE SPECIFIC GROUND THAT THE ORDER IS PASSED BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF. GROUND NO.2 FOR THE SA KE OF COMPLETENESS IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: 2. THAT THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) ROHTAK FOR NOT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND DISMISSING THE APPEA L ON THE BASIS THAT NO REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, DESPI TE THE FACT THAT NOTICES OF HEARING NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN PERSON THROUGH POST. THE ORDER ITA N O.6099 /DEL/2019 RAJVA NTI DEVI VS. ITO PAGE 2 OF 3 PASSED ON 14.03.2019 WHEREAS IT IS MENTIONED THAT HEARING WAS FIXED ON 03.06.2019 AND ON 13.06.2019. THE ORDER IS PASSED BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING . HENCE, THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST TH E CARDINAL PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ACCORDING LY ORDER DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. [EMPHASIS SUPPLIED] 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BUT AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED STATING TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS IN NOT THE POSITION TO CONTACT HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE. IN VIEW OF THE PATENT PROCEDURAL DEFICIENCY NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER A S IT COULD NOT STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS REJECTE D. THE APPEAL WAS HEARD EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR. DR AND IT WAS DIRECTED THAT THE ISSUE IS BEING RESTORED BA CK TO THE CIT(A) FOR A FRESH CONSIDERATION. 3. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE B EFORE THE CIT(A) REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ADDITIO NS MADE IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S 147/144 WERE ASSAILED AND ULTIMATELY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED, THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED RE FERRING TO THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TUKOJI RAO HO LKAR VS. CWT [1997] 233 ITR 480 HOLAKAR AND CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. 38 ITD (DEL.) 320 ETC. 4. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER SHOWS THAT THE LD. CI T(A) IN PAGE 2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER NOTES THAT THE CASE WAS AGAIN RE-FIXED FOR 13.06.2019 ITA N O.6099 /DEL/2019 RAJVA NTI DEVI VS. ITO PAGE 3 OF 3 (FINAL OPPORTUNITY ). HOWEVER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ORDER WAS PASSED ON 14.03.2019 . THUS, PATENTLY THE ORDER WAS PASSED WITHOUT GIV ING DUE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE; AND WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THE DATE OF HEARING, ITSELF. SUCH AN ORDER CANNOT BE UPHELD. THE IMPUGN ED ORDER ACCORDINGLY, OPEN TO THE CHARGE OF BIAS, PREJUDICE AND ARBITRARINES S IS SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WIT H A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE , IN ITS OWN INTERESTS, IS DIRECTED TO ENSURE FULL AND PROPER PARTICIPATION BE FORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND NOT ABUSE THE TRUST REPOSED. SAID OR DER WAS PRONOUNCED AT THE TIME OF VIRTUAL HEARING ITSELF IN THE PRESENCE OF T HE PARTIES WEBEX. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. SD/- (D IVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 07/09/2021 PK/PS KAVITA ARORA, SPS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI