VANDANA R. MALIK, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI

ITA 663/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93072 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

F IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JM AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, A M .. , . . , ./ I.T.A. NO. 663 /MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 VANDANA R.MALIK, 301, AQUAMARINE, PLOT NO. 273B, CARTER ROAD, BANDRA (W), MUMBAI 400 050. / VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 19(3, MUMBAI. ./ PAN : AAJPM4486B ( ! / APPELLANT ) .. ( '# ! / RESPONDENT ) A PPELLANT BY SHRI TARANDEEP SINGH R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI PAVAN KUMAR BEERLA $ % & ' ( ) / DATE OF HEARING : 07-07-2015 *+,- ' ( ) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07-07-2015 [ . / O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, J.M . : .. , THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2009-10, CHALLEN GING THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE IN T HE MATTER OF CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 AMOUNTING TO RS. 12,00,000/- ON THE ASSESEE. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C OF TH E ACT AND IN DISPOSING OF ITS APPEAL EX PARTE WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD. ITA 663/M/14 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT DU RING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SOU GHT ADJOURNMENTS OF HEARINGS FIXED ON 25-9-13 ON THE GROUND THAT SHE WA S UNABLE TO APPEAR IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND REQUESTED ADJOURNMENT OF THE APPEAL BY ONE MONTH. ACCORDINGLY, THE HEARING WAS FIXED ON 13-11- 13, BUT SHE FAILED TO APPEAR ON THIS DATE ALSO ON IDENTICAL GROUNDS. SUBS EQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SOUGHT ANOTHER DATE OF HEARING VIDE HER LETTE R DATED 27-9-2013 STATING THEREIN THAT DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, SH E OR HER AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT APPEAR ON 13-11-2013. ACCO RDING TO THE LD. CIT(A), SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS ALREADY AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEKING A DJOURNMENT, HE PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE. IN OUR OPINION, ALL THESE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE AS MENTIONED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 3 OF HIS IMPUGNED ORDER SHOW THAT IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE SUF FICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD CAN BE SAID TO BE EFFECTIVELY GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO US, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE ESPECIALLY WHEN ON THE DATE OF LAST HEARING F IXED ON 13-11-2015, ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE IN WRITING G IVING SUFFICIENT REASONS. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE,WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DISPOSING OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA 663/M/14 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH JULY, 2015. . ' *+,- $ /0 1 2 07-07-2015 + ' 3& SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) (A.D. JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /J UDICIAL MEMBER / $ & MUMBAI ; 1 DATED 07-07-2015 [ %.../ R.K. R.K. R.K. R.K. , SR. PS ! ' #$%& ' &$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ! / THE APPELLANT 2. '# ! / THE RESPONDENT. 3. $ E( () / THE CIT(A)- 30, MUMBAI 4. $ E( / CIT- CITY -19, MUMBAI 5. H%I 3 '(JK , ) JK- , / $ & / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI F BENCH 6. 3 L M & / GUARD FILE. ! ( / BY ORDER, # H( '( //TRUE COPY// )/(* + ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / $ & / ITAT, MUMBAI