M/s Ashok Sales Company Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kanpur

ITA 66/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2749 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDISH SHRI C K SINGH D

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.66/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.66/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 M/S ASHOK SALES COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, 51/92, SHREE BHAGWATI TOWER, NAYAGANJ, KANPUR. PAN:AABCA 1683 M VS. A.C.I.T.-5, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-II, KANPUR DATED 12/12/2017 PERTAINING ASSES SMENT YEAR 2013-2014. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE NOTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER AS ACCORDING TO HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON T HE DATES WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FROM THE O RDER OF CIT(A), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE CIT(A) HAD ISSUED ONLY TWO NOTICE S TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED NOR FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THE CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER. WE FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY APPELLANT BY SHRI JAGDISH, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI C. K. SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 01/11/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02 / 11/ 201 8 I.T.A. NO.66/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013-14 2 SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEARNED CIT(A) H AS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250 WHIC H DEALS WITH THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIG HT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN THE N ATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORT UNITY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT TO SEEK UND UE ADJOURNMENT AND CO- OPERATE WITH LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APP EAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02/11 /2018) SD/. SD/. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:02/11/2018 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW