Vivek Gupta, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 83/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3536 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 13-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR SHARMA SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: VIMAL PARAKH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JM ITA NO.83/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2012-13 SHRI VIVEK GUPTA, BT 36, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI 110 088. PAN NO. AJJPG6648L VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 34 (2), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VIMAL PARAKH, CA REVENUE BY : SH. ANIL K UMAR SHARMA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.04.2017 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.11.2016 OF LD. CIT (A)-12, NEW DELHI. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, LD. AR FOR THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE AND, THEREFORE, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO T HE LD. CIT (A) FOR PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IN HI S RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR INSPITE OF VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD GRA NTED BY THE LD. ITA NO.83/DEL/2017 2 CIT(A). THEREFORE, THE APPEAL WAS RIGHTLY DISMISSE D BY THE LD. CIT (A) FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE LD. C IT (A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE. IT IS ALSO NO TICED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) STATED THAT THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 10.11. 2016 FIXING THE APPEAL ON 23.11.2016 BUT, ON THAT DAY, NEITHER ANYB ODY APPEARED NOR ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION / ANY LETTER FOR ADJOURN MENT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, HE DID NOT MENTION AS TO WHETHER THE SAID NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. I T IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. IN THE PRESENT CASES, SINCE DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WAS NOT GRANTED BY THE LD. C IT (A), WE, THEREFORE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS IS SUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH, IN ACCO RDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/04/2017 ) SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED: 18/04/2017 TS ITA NO.83/DEL/2017 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR