RAJESH KR. CHOUDHARY, BHAGALPUR V. ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAGALPUR

ITA 64/PAT/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1358 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BALKRISHAN MISHRA; PRANAB KR JHA ARS
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Right to appeal; Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

1 ITA NOS. 58-61/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (HUF), AYS 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12& 2012-13 ITA NOS.62-64/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY, AYS. 2010-11 TO 2012-13 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH, VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA ( ) . . , ) [BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM] I.T.A. NOS. 58 TO 61/PAT/2020 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2007-08 & 2008-09, 2011-12 & 2012-13 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (HUF) (PAN: AAKHR8179P) VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHAGALPUR. APPELLANT RESPONDENT & I.T.A. NOS. 62 TO 64/PAT/2020 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2010-11 TO 2012-13 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (PAN: AKCPC1978P) VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHAGALPUR. APPELLANT RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING 09.12.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.12.2020 FOR THE APPELLANT S/SHRI BALKRISHAN MISHRA & PRANAB KR. JHA, ARS. FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI AJAY KUMAR, DR ORDER ALL THESE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE (INDIVIDUAL) ARE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A), BHAGALPUR DATED 17.08.2018 AND ALL THE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE (HUF) ARE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 06.06.2018, 07.06.2018 AND 17.08.2018 RESPECTIVELY. SINCE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL AND GROUNDS ARE COMMON, I DISPOSE OF ALL THESE APPEALS BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER TAKING APPEAL OF ASSESSEE HUF FOR AY 2007-08 AS LEAD CASE AND THE RESULT WILL BE FOLLOWED IN ALL OTHER IDENTICAL APPEALS EXCEPT THE DATES OF HEARING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ARE DIFFERENT WHICH FACT IS DISCERNIBLE FROM PARA 2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A) IN ALL CASES. 2 ITA NOS. 58-61/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (HUF), AYS 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12& 2012-13 ITA NOS.62-64/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY, AYS. 2010-11 TO 2012-13 2. ON PERUSAL OF THE GROUND NO. 1 REVEALS THAT ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), BHAGALPUR WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. ADVOCATE APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI BALKRISHAN MISHRA CONTENDED THAT IN RESPECT OF APPEAL FOR AY 2007-08, THE LD. CIT(A) THOUGH HAVE MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICES WERE ISSUED ON VARIOUS DATES VIZ. 28.09.2016, 01.12.2017 AND 07.05.2018 HOWEVER, HAS FAIRLY STATED TO HAVE FIXED THE APPEAL ONLY ON 25.05.2018. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, IT HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE OF HEARING AND, THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS IN VIOLATION OF THE NATURAL JUSTICE AND, THEREFORE, IT IS BAD IN LAW AND, THEREFORE, HAS TO BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEALS ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN GIVEN VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, HAS NOT BOTHERED TO APPEAR. SO, HE DOES NOT WANT ME TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE IMPUGNED ORDER REVEALS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS STATED TO HAVE ISSUED NOTICES ON VARIOUS DATES, HOWEVER, HAS ACKNOWLEDGED TO HAVE FIXED THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ONLY ON 25.05.2018 AS DISCERNED FROM PARA TWO (2) OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE MAIN PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IT HAS NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING 25.05.2018. AND IT IS NOTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED ON 06.06.2018. THIS ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) CANNOT BE COUNTENANCED. IT HAS TO BE KEPT IN MIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A STATUTORY RIGHT TO FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE AO AND SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) READS AS UNDER: SEC. 250(6) THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. 4. AS PER THE AFORESAID SUB-SECTION (6) OF SEC. 250 OF THE ACT, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL IN WRITING AND HAS TO STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND THE 3 ITA NOS. 58-61/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (HUF), AYS 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12& 2012-13 ITA NOS.62-64/PAT/2020 RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY, AYS. 2010-11 TO 2012-13 DECISION THEREON ALONG WITH THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. FAILURE TO DO SO WILL RENDER MEANINGLESS THE STATUTORY RIGHT OF APPEAL VESTED WITH THE ASSESSEE. I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. IN THIS CASE, IT IS NOTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25.05.2018 AND HE HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL ON 06.06.2018 AND SIMILAR ACTION HAS BEEN RESORTED TO BY THE LD CIT(A) BY FIXING THE APPEAL ON A DATE AND DISMISSING THE APPEALS EX-PARTE WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE WHICH ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AND, THEREFORE, I SET ASIDE ALL THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND ALL THE APPEALS BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE DILIGENT AND IF ADVISED TO FILE WRITTEN SUBMISSION ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENTS TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM AND THE LD. CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER AS ENVISAGED U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE TO LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11TH DECEMBER, 2020. SD/- (ABY. T. VARKEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2020 JD(SR.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY (HUF) & RISHIKESH KR. CHOUDHARY, FLAT NO. 1626, TOWER 16, PURVANCHAL ROYAL PARK, NOIDA, SECTOR-137, UTTAR PRADESH, PIN-201304 2 RESPONDENT ITO, WARD 1(2), BHAGALPUR 3. 4. 5. CIT(A), BHAGALPUR CIT- BHAGALPUR DR, ITAT, PATNA. / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SENIOR PVT. SECY/DDO.