Shiv Kumar HUF, Bareilly V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Bareilly

ITA 664/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0915 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAKESH GARG SHRI C K SINGH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.664/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.664/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 SHRI SHIV KUMAR HUF, 47-A, URMILA COTTAGE, OPP. ALAKHANATH MANDIR, BAREILLY. PAN:AABHS 3053 G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(2), BAREILLY. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FRO M THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), BAREILLY DATED 17/08/2017 AS PER TH E GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON RECORD. 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 TWO NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED NOR FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSI ONS AND ULTIMATELY THE CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PARTE ORDER. HOWEVER, WE FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEAR NED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SECT ION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO APPELLANT BY SHRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE ASSESSEE BY SHRI C. K. SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 15/11/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20 / 11 /201 8 I.T.A. NO.664/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. EVEN TH E NATURAL 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 SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO- OPERATE WITH LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISPOSING OF THE APP EAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/11 /2018) SD/. SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) (PART HA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:20/11/2018 *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