, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , . , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.7805/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 MR. BHARAT PARMANAND KELWANI, 15/7, RAMAKRISHNA, CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY, ROAD NO.9, PLOT NO.34, JVPD SCHEME, JUHU, MUMBAI-400049 / VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, GROUND FLOOR, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI-400051 ( '#$% & /ASSESSEE) ( / REVENUE) P.A. NO. AA GPK3443H '#$% & / ASSESSEE BY NONE / REVENUE BY SHRI LOVE KUMAR-DR ' '( ) & * / DATE OF HEARING 08/04/2015 ) & * / DATE OF ORDER: 08/04/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 29/08/2011 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, MR. BHARAT PARMANAND KELWANI 2 ON VARIOUS GROUNDS BROADLY VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE O F NATURAL JUSTICE ON THE PLEA THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH OTHER GROUNDS. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT ON 22/10 /2013, THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE . HOWEVER, ON 26/03/2014 DUE TO PAUCITY OF TIME, THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED. TODAY AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO OPT ION TO PROCEED EX-PARTY QUA THE ASSESSEE AND TEND TO DISPO SE OFF THIS APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON R ECORD. 2.1. WITHOUT GOING INTO MUCH DELIBERATION, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED ON 30/12/2010 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 19 61 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT). LIKEWISE, BEFORE THE LD. CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APP EAR ON 25/08/2009 AND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE PLE A THAT NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS NOT SERVED UP ON THE ASSESSEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD, THEREFORE, I T WAS BEYOND LIMITATION PERIOD. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALSO PASSED PRACTICALLY EX-PARTY ORDE R. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT, KEEPING IN VIEW, THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, NO PERSON SHOULD BE C ONDEMNED UNHEARD, THEREFORE, WE REMAND THIS APPEAL FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFIC ER WITH FURTHER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE BY THE ASSESSEE , IF ANY. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO CASUAL IN ITS A PPROACH, MR. BHARAT PARMANAND KELWANI 3 THEREFORE, DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS FROM THE RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER FAILING WHICH THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS FREE TO DECIDE T HE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE L D. ASSESSING OFFICER IS FREE TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON A MUTUALLY AGREED DATE (IF THE ASSESSEE APPROACHES THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THE STIPULATE PERIOD OF FI FTEEN DAYS). THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STAT ISTICAL PURPOSES. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. DR, AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 08/04/2015. SD/- SD/- ( D.KARUNAKARA RAO ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ( MUMBAI; +' DATED : 08/04/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. '. . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ,-./ / THE APPELLANT 2. 01./ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 2 2 ' 3& ( ,- ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. P4. 2 2 ' 3& / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 56 0&'# , 2 ,-* ,# , ' ( / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. $ 7( / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, 15-& 0& //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , ' ( / ITAT, MUMBAI