Sh. Satbarg Singh, Mohali V. ITO, Chandigarh

ITA 831/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68561 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1994-1995
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 831TO 833/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1994-95 ITA NOS. 834TO 836/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96 ITA NOS. 837TO 839/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97 ITA NOS. 840 TO 842/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1997-98 & ITA NOS. 843TO 845/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1998-99 SHRI SATBARG SINGH, VS THE I.T.O., WARD 1(9), MOHALI (NOW ITO WARD 2(3), CHANDIGARH PAN NO. ADHPS 6279 B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING : 24.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :07.11.2013 APPELLANT BY : SHRI PRIKSHIT AGGARWAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA ORDER PER BENCH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS ALL DATED 23.5.2013 OF LD. CIT(A), CHANDIGAR H AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED U/S 144 READ WITH SECTION 147, PENALT Y ORDERS PASSED U/S 271(B) AND PENALTY ORDERS PASSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 2. IN THESE APPEALS VARIOUS ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THE INDIVIDUAL APPEALS. HOWEVER, PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT LD. CIT(A ) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEALS 2 MAINLY BECAUSE APPEALS WERE LATE BY ALMOST 11 YEARS . THE FOLLOWING ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED IN ALL THE APPEALS SEPARATELY. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSM ENT DATED 26.12.2000. IN COLUMN NO. 7 OF FORM NO. 35 F ILED BY THE APPELLANT, THE DATE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF DEMAND HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS NOT AVAILABLE. APPARENTLY, THE APPE LLANT DID NOT WANT TO DISCLOSE THIS INFORMATION AS IT WOULD H AVE BEEN AGAINST THE INTEREST OF THE APPELLANT. IN THE NORM AL COURSE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER WOULD HAVE BEEN SERVED ON THE APPELL ANT SOMETIME IN THE EARLY PART OF THE YEAR 2001, BUT TH E APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED ONLY ON 17.01.2013 AND SO IT IS LATE BY MORE THAN 11 YEARS. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONGWITH FORM NO. 35. SINCE THE APPEAL HAS TO BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THE ORDER, IT IS FILED BELATEDLY AND SO CANNOT B E ADMITTED. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN-LIMINE. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 3. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D THAT IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD LOST HIS WIFE. THERE WERE OTHER TRAGE DIES IN THE FAMILY. HE HAD LEFT HIS JOB BECAUSE OF SUCH TRAGEDIES AND WAS NOT INTERESTED IN ANY OF THE INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS. HOWEVER, WHEN HIS RETIREME NT BENEFITS WERE BLOCKED BY THE DEPARTMENT, HE WAS FORCE TO FILE THESE APPEA LS. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THERE WAS GENUINE REASON FOR LATE FILING OF THESE APPEAL S. THE CIT(A) HAS NOT ISSUED EVEN A NOTICE OR GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN T HE DELAY AND ALSO MERITS OF THE ASSESSEES APPEALS. THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN DISM ISSED IN LIMINE WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFOR E, THE IMPUGNED ORDERS MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A). 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF CIT(A). 3 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT APPEALS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMINE. NO MENTION REGARDING SERVICE OF NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN IN THE ORDER. THE ASSESSEE MAY HAVE GENUINE REASONS F OR FILING THE APPEALS LATE. THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRES THA T NOBODY SHOULD BE HANGED WITHOUT HEARING IN. IT IS SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT NATURAL PRINCIPALS OF JUSTICE HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED EVEN IN THE INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS. SINCE NO OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN GIVEN WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO ALLOW A ND GIVE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY AS WELL AS EXPLA IN THE MERITS OF THE APPEALS. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE IN THE A PPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHEN NOTICES ARE ISSUED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.11.2 013 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R.SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMER DATED : 07 TH NOVEMBER, 2013 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH