Mesars Satvik Polychem Private Limited, Kanpur V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-VI, Kanpur

ITA 810/LKW/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5408 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.810/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.810/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 M/S SATVIK POLYCHEM PVT. LTD., 203, CHARAN PADUKA APARTMENT, 120/839, LAJPAT NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AANCS 1781 L VS. DY.C.I.T., RANGE-VI, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER A. D. JAIN: V.P. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-II, KANPUR DATED 10/10/2017 PERTAINI NG TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE NOTED THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER AS ACCORDING TO HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON THE DAT E WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FROM THE ORDER OF LE ARNED CIT(A), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE CIT(A) HAD ISSUED ONLY ONE NOTICE DATED 28/09/2017 FIXING THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE ON 09/10/2017. HOWE VER, FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) IT IS NOT CLEAR AS TO WHETHER THE NO TICE ISSUED BY LEARNED APPELLANT BY SHRI GOVINDA KRISHNA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI A. K. BAR, CIT (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING 22/01/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25 / 01 /201 9 I.T.A. NO.810/LKW/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 CIT(A) WAS ACTUALLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE OR NOT A ND WHEN NOBODY APPEARED ON THE DATE FIXED, CIT(A) PASSED THE EX-PA RTE ORDER. HOWEVER, WE FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO T HE ASSESSEE AS LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THE PR OVISION OF SECTION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALLOWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING O F APPEAL. EVEN THE NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE DI SPOSED OF WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE PROPER AN D SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW, FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND REST ORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SH ALL REFIX THE SAID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY 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 D ISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25/01/2019) SD/. SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ( A. D. JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED:25/01/2019 *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