M/s Five Initials (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 6150/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 77812 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARWINDER KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: S N MATHUR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER ITA NO. 6150/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 FIVE INITIALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS C IT (APPEALS)-XIII 137, SWASTIK KUNJ, SECTOR-13 ROHINI NEW DELHI 110 085 NEW DELHI. (PAN AAACF8075B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. N. MATHUR, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PARWINDER KAUR, SR. DR ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE HAS QUESTIONED FIRST APPELLATION ORDER ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN PAS SING AN EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESS EE. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGN ORING THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE AR WHILE PASSI NG AN EX-PARTE ORDER. 3. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN N OT PASSING AN ORDER ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DI SALLOWING THE CLAIM OF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSES OF RS. 10,37,602/- WHICH WAS LEGALLY ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IG NORING THE FACT THAT BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES PERTAINING TO YEAR HAD DULY BEEN ACCEPTED AND ACCORDINGLY HAD TO BE SET OFF AGAINST YEARS INCOME. ITA NO. 6150/DEL/12 2 2. LD. AR REITERATED THE CONTENTS OF GROUND N OS. 1 TO 3 THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESEE AND IGNORING THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FI LED BY THE LD. AR. THE OTHER SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR REMAINED THAT THE LD. CIT( A) HAS NOT DISPOSED OFF THE FIRST APPEAL ON ITS MERITS. HE SUBMITTED FURTHER TH AT FOR THE LAPSE IF ANY ON THE PART OF THE LD. COUNSEL REPRESENTING THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE PUN ISHED. LD. DR OPPOSED THE ABOVE GROUNDS WITH THIS SUBMISSION THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH THE ASSESSEE DID N OT BOTHER TO AVAIL. 3. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSION WE FIND T HAT IT IS A FIT CASE TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON ITS MERITS AFTER AFFORDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THIS DIRECTION THE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. IN THE RESULT APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JULY, 2014. SD/- SD/- (J.S. REDDY) ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 25 TH JULY, 2014 *VEENA COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT