Sh. Ravinder Kumar Goyal, Sunam V. ITO, Sunam HQ, Sangrur

ITA 694/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3952 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 694/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI RAVINDER KUMAR GOYAL, V THE ITO, PROP. M/S GOYAL AUTOMOBILE, SUNAM (HQ-SANGRUR). RISHTA RESORT, BATHINDA ROAD, SUNAM. PAN : AAQPG1018E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHOK GOYAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 04.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10. 2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 12.04.2018 OF CIT(A)-1 L UDHIANA PERTAINING TO 2009-10 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS WHEREIN THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS ASSAILED. 2. THE LD. AR AT THE TIME OF HEARING, INVITING ATTENTION T O THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT INITIALLY ASSESSEE WAS REPR ESENTED BY HIS COUNSEL SHRI SURINDER JAIN ON WHICH DATE HE SOUGHT ADJOU RNMENT. THEREAFTER, NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING AS 14.11.201 7 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THER E IS NO REFERENCE MADE TO ANY SUCH NOTICE IN PARA 2. THE ONLY DATE OF NO TICE MENTIONED IS 15.09.2017. HOWEVER, ACCEPTING THE STATEMENT AT BAR MAD E BY THE LD. AR THAT FOR THE SPECIFIC DATE, NO NOTICE WAS RECEIVED. AFTER HE ARING LD. SR.DR, IT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORD ER AFTER ASCERTAINING THAT THE ADDRESS AVAILABLE ON RECORD CONTINU ES TO REMAIN THE SAME. 3. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE IN THE FACTS O F THE PRESENT CASE IS STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN SALE OF MOBILE COUPONS ON WHO LESALE BASIS AND HAD DECLARED A RETURN OF RS. 10,45,870/-. THE CASE WAS R EOPENED AFTER ITA 694/CHD/2018 A.Y.2009-10 PAGE 2 OF 2 ISSUING OF NOTICE U/S 148 LEADING ASSESSMENT BEING CONCLUDE D AT AN INCOME OF RS. 22,04,230/-. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADD ITION ON MERIT AS WELL AS THE ACTION OF THE AO IN RE-OPENING THE CASE U/S 148. 3.1 IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT IS NOTICED THAT ON 15.09.2017, THE ASSESSEE WAS REPRESENTED BY HIS COUNSEL. THEREAFTER, THE CASE APPARENTLY WAS RE-FIXED FOR HEARING ON TWO DIFFERENT DATES WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE LEADING TO THE PASSING OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER. SINCE SPECIFIC DATES ARE NOT MENTIONED IN THE ORDER, WE FIN D THAT THE ASSERTIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NOTICE FOR A SPECIFIC DATE WAS NOT RECEIVED CANNOT BE ADDRESSED, HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS ALLEGEDLY ON THE GROUND THAT SPECIFIC NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED. ACCORDINGLY, ACCEPT ING ORAL UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE LD. AR, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A D IRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASS ESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WHILE SO DIRECTING, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY OF THE ABUSE OF THE TRUST REPOS ED, THE CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF THE MATE RIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT A T THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.10. 2018. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ( DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.