Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association, Kanpur V. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur

ITA 66/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4021 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH GARG SHRI AMIT NIGAM
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. P . K. BANSAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T VARKEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 66/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 UTTAR PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION E - 23, KAMLA NAGAR TO WNSHIP KANPUR V. ACIT KANPUR T AN /PAN : AAACU7822R (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AMIT NIGAM, D.R> DATE OF HEARING: 11 08 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30 08 2016 PER ABY T VARKEY, J. M : O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - II, KANPUR DATED 30.11.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11. 2 . AT THE OUTSET ITSELF THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THIS WAS AN EX - PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT OF THE MATTER. SINCE THERE IS A VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THE APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN HEARD ON MERIT, THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE M ATTER MAY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE MATTER AFRESH. 3 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOTED THE FOLLOWING TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE: - [ ITA NO.66/LKW/2016. A.Y. 2010 - 11 ] 2 2. NOTICES DATED 11 - 06 - 2014, 0 8 - 01 - 2015, 18 - 05 - 2015, AND 20 - 10 - 2015 FOR ASSESSEE'S COMPLIANCE ON 18 - 06 - 2014, 15 - 01 - 2015, 22 - 05 - 2015 AND 02 - 11 - 2015 RESPECTIVELY. EVEN THE ADJOURNMENT SEEKED VIDE ASSESSEE'S DATED 16 - 06 - 2014, BUT NO COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN MADE. VIDE ANOTHER LETTER DATED 22 - 0 5 - 2015, THE ASSESSEE SEEKED ADJOURNMENT FOR 28 - 05 - 2015, BUT NO COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN MADE TILL DATE. IN REPLIES TO ALL THE NOTICES ISSUED NOT EVEN A SINGLE COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN MADE TILL DATE. NO WRITTEN SUBMISSION OR ANY PAPER BOOKS HAS BEEN FILED IN SUPPORT OF ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN THIS OFFICE. . 4 . A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WHICH HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO PROCEED WITH THE EX - PARTE SHOWS THAT THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ISSUED NOTICES ON 11 - 06 - 2014, 08 - 01 - 2015, 18 - 05 - 201 5, AND 20 - 10 - 2015 FOR ASSESSEE'S COMPLIANCE ON 18 - 06 - 2014, 15 - 01 - 2015, 22 - 05 - 2015 AND 02 - 11 - 2015 RESPECTIVELY . HOWEVER, WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LD. CIT(A) INTEND TO STATE FROM THE WORDS EVEN ADJOURNMENT SEEKED VIDE LETTER DATED 16.6. 201 4 , BUT NO CO MPLIANCE HAS BEEN MADE . WE ARE NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND ANY MEANING OUT OF THE SAID STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A). SO WHAT WE CAN READ FROM THE AFORESAID FACTS AS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS THAT FIRST THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SENT NOTICE DATED 11 - 06 - 2014, ASKING THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 18.6.2014, AND THEREAFTER, NOTICE DATED 08 - 01 - 2015 REQUIRING THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 15.1.2014, AND THEN, NOTICE DATED 18 - 05 - 2015 REQUIRING THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 22 - 05 - 2015 AND THEREAFTER, NOTICE DATED 20.10.2015 ASKI NG THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 2.11.2015 . THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION VIDE LETTER DATED 16.6.2014 AND VIDE LETTER DATED 2 2.5. 2015. THEREAFTER, WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LD. CIT(A) MEAN T TO SA Y BY ADJOURNMENT NOT COMPLIED WITH . FROM THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE SAFELY INFER THAT WHEN THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT DURING THE FIRST HEARING AND THEREAFTER DURING THE THIRD HEARING . THEREAFTER, WE NOTE THAT THE ASSES SEE SOUGHT IN THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT, THE MATTER TO BE LISTED ON 28.5.2015, [ ITA NO.66/LKW/2016. A.Y. 2010 - 11 ] 3 HOWEVER, WE NOTE THAT THE NEXT HEARING WAS FIXED FOR 2.11.2015 VIDE NOTICE DATED 20.10.2015 AND THEREAFTER WE DO NOT KNOW WHICH DATE HAS BEEN FIXED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR H EARING AND WE FIND THAT THE EX - PARTE ORDER IS DATED 30 .11.2015. SO, W E DO NOT KNOW THE DATE ON WHICH THE LAST OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE AFORESAID CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPI NION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT AND PLEAD ITS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON MERIT. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT HIM TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL ON MERIT IN ACCORD ANCE TO LAW AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO - OPERATE WITH THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.8.201 6. SD/ - SD/ - [P. K. BANSAL ] [ ABY T VARKEY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30 TH 1 . APPELLANT AUGUST , 2016 JJ: 1608 COPY FORWARDED TO: 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR