Manoj Ranchhod Vasoya, Rajkot V. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(3), Aaykar Bhavan,Rajkot

ITA 61/RJT/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5804 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT (SMC) BENCH BEFORE DR. A. L.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.61/RJT/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hea ring) Manoj Ranchhod Vasoya, Mavatar, Kaveri Society – 3, Madvi Gurukul, Nr. Bapa Sitaram Chowk, Rajkot - 360002 Vs. The ITO, Ward – 1(1)(3), Rajkot थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AEWPV9811Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rashmin Vekariya, AR Respondent by Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15/07/2024 Date of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 29.12.2023,which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 28.12.2019. 2. At the outset, Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee’s appeal was filed by an accountant before the Ld. CIT(A) and that accountant had given his personal e-mail id and address to the Department. The notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings, for conducting hearing, on the e-mail id of the Page | 2 ITA.61/Rjt/2024/AY.2017-18 Manoj Ranchhod Vaosya said accountant who did not inform the assessee and as a result, the assessee could not appear before Ld. CIT(A), therefore Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order. The Learned Counsel contended that assessee is now ready to submit details and documents before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 3. On the other hand, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue submitted that in spite of giving lot of opportunities of hearing during the appellate proceedings, the assessee did not file the documents, details and written submission before the Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) issued five notices of hearing, however the assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the assessee was negligent during the appellate proceedings, hence appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 4. I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee did not submit details and documents before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order. I note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. That is, Ld. CIT(A) did not pass order on merit based on the material available on record. Hence, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A). I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the Page | 3 ITA.61/Rjt/2024/AY.2017-18 Manoj Ranchhod Vaosya merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 15/07/2024 in the open court. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rajkot दनांक/ Date: 15/07/2024 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot