Hiteshbhai Odhavjibhai Godhani, Surat V. Income Tax Officer, Circle 3(2), Surat, Surat

ITA 822/SRT/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8568 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 31-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.822/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Hiteshbhai Odhavjibhai Godhani, Ashwin Parekh & Co., Chartered Accountant, 401-404, Rajhans Bonista, B/h. Ramchowk Temple, Ghod dod Road, Surat – 395009. Email: [e-mail] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(2), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAWPG 3373 L (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ashwin K. Parekh, CA Respondent by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/02/2024 Date of Pronouncement 22/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in short ‘the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’) dated 10.10.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 26.12.2018. 2. At the outset itself, Learned Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that during the appellate proceedings, the notice was not served on the assessee. In fact, the notice was served on previous Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of Page | 2 ITA.822/SRT/2023/AY.2016-17 Hiteshbhai Odhavjibhai Godhani the assessee. The Ld. Counsel took us through paper book page no.23 and stated that the notice of NFAC/ld. CIT(A) served on the wrong e- mail address and therefore the assessee could not appear before the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) and could not file the details and documents before the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) and consequently, the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) passed an ex parte order. Hence Ld. Counsel contended that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A), therefore matter may be remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 3. On the other hand, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue strongly opposed the plea taken by Ld. Counsel of the assessee, and stated that since the assessee did not appear before the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) and the order passed by the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order, therefore appeal of the assessee should be dismissed. Further, during appellate proceedings, no response received from the assessee to substantiate his claim in support of grounds of appeal, though enough opportunities of being heard were given to him, as tabulated in para-4 of the order of ld CIT(A). The assessee has not made any argument much less submitted any evidence on the basis of which the proposition made by the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order can be controverted. Hence, appeal of the assessee should be dismissed. 4. We have herd both the parties. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the NFAC/ld. CIT(A). We also note that NFAC/ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, as the assessee did not get opportunity to submit the details and Page | 3 ITA.822/SRT/2023/AY.2016-17 Hiteshbhai Odhavjibhai Godhani documents before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) due to non-receipt of notice of hearing. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 22/02/2024 in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER स ू रत /Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 22/02/2024 SAMANTA /Dkp (outsourcing Sr.PS) Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // True Copy // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat