Highlander Charitable Society, Kinnaur V. ITO, Rampur Bsr.

ITA 667/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8904 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SUDERSHAN JCIT
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 143(1); 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .., !' '# $, % &' BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, J M ./ ITA NO. 667/CHD/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 HIGHLANDER CHARITABLE SOCIETY, HIGHLANDER SCHOOL, SABZI MOHALLA, RECKONG PEO, DISTT. KINNAUR (HP). THE ITO, KHANERI, RAMPUR BSR. (HP). ./ PAN NO: AAATH5866K / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARRY RIKHY, ADVOCATE # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI ARVIND SUDERSHAN, JCIT $ % ! &/ DATE OF HEARING : 30.07.2020 '()* ! &/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.07.2020 &(/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2018 OF THE LD. CIT(A), PALAMPUR. 2. THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS A PPEAL : 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PALAMPUR IS DEFECTIVE BOTH IN LAW AN D FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT NO REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT TO REPRESENT ITS CASE WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY AS THE APPELLANT RECEIVED THE NOTICES VERY LATE DUE TO SNOW FALL IN THAT AREA. 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS), PALAMPUR IS UNJUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION O F RS. ITA 667/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 2 L1,20,381/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WITHO UT GIVING THE BENEFIT OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT. THIS ADDITION IS UNCALLED FOR AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 4. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS), PALAMPUR IS UNJUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION O F RS.L 1,20,381/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AS THE APPELLANT IS A CHARITABLE SOCIETY DOING CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AND DULY FULFIL LS THE REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. THIS ADDITION IS UNCALLED FOR AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 5. THAT ANY OTHER GROUND MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED TO B E TAKEN AT THE TIME OF APPEAL WITH DUE PERMISSION. 3. VIDE GROUND NO. 2 THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSE SSEE RELATES TO THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD. 4. THE FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASS ESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 13.10.2010 DECLARING NIL INCOME WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 ( IN SHORT THE ACT) ON 01.03.2012. LATER ON, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. HOWEVER, THE AO PASSED ASSESSMENT OR DER DATED 18.03.2012 EX-PARTE U/S 144 OF THE ACT. HE MENTION ED THAT THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 24.01.2013 FIXING HEARING ON 1 4.02.2013 BUT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. AGAIN A SHOW CAUSE NOTI CE WAS ISSUED FOR COMPLIANCE ON 08.03.2013, BUT NOBODY RES PONDED. HE, THEREFORE, PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER EX-PARTE ON 18.03.2013 AND ASSESSED THIS INCOME AT RS. 11,20,38 1/-. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO ALSO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E BY ITA 667/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 3 PASSING THE IMPUGNED EX-PARTE ORDER. HE MENTIONED THAT VARIOUS NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BUT NOB ODY ATTENDED, THE LAST NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 26.11.2018 FIXING THE DATE FOR HEARING ON 18.12.2018 BUT NONE ATTENDED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISS ED AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO WAS UPHELD. NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SITUATED IN A REMOTE AND HILLY VILLAGE GAZA, DISTT. LAHAUL & SPITI AND THAT NO NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS E VER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, EITHER FROM THE AO OR BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A). HE REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE A O SO THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY FURNISH THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND THE MATTER MAY BE DECIDED ON MERIT. 7. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. SR.DR, ALTHOUG H SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT( A). 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN TH E PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE AO AS WELL AS T HE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THEIR RESPECTIVE ORDERS EX-PARTE, BUT NEITHE R THE AO NOR LD. CIT(A) BROUGHT ON RECORD THAT THE NOTICE FOR HE ARING WAS ITA 667/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 4 SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UN-HEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . WE, THEREFORE, BY KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE T HIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN A CCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORT UNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.07.2020 SD/- SD/- '# $ .., (SANJAY GARG ) ( N.K. SAIN I) % &'/ JUDICIAL MEMBER / VICE PRESIDENT POONAM (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. $ E / CIT 4. $ E ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. -KL M, & M, OPQLR/ DR, I TAT, CHANDIGARH 6. LQ X%/ GUARD FILE