Kondala Rao Kurmayagari , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

ITA 851/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3710 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-02-2020
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B SAI PRASAD
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 147

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 851 /HYD/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 08 - 09 KONDALA RAO KURMAYAGARI, HYDERABAD. PAN: AGWPK 0763 E VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, W ARD - 11(5), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI B. SAI PRASAD REVENUE BY: SRI SUNIL KUMAR PAND E Y, DR DATE OF HEARING: 21/02/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 /02/2020 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 1, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 0114/2016 - 17/ITO, WARD - 11(5)/CIT(A) - 1/HYD /2018 - 19, DATED 12/03/2019 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 AND U/S. 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2008 - 09. 2 THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE APPELLATE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) IS IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, IN AS MUCH AS THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AFFORDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 3. THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS AS THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,12,22,114/ - MADE WAS PRO TECTIVE IN 2 NATURE AND THE SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION OF THE SAME AMOUNT MADE IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 WAS DELETED BY THE HONBLE ITAT. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS QT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROV IDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE THE APPEAL . LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATE OF HEARING, THOUGH THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), HE DID NOT F URNISH ANY DETAILS OR OFFER ANY EXPLANATIONS . IT WAS THEREFORE ARGUED THAT U NDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - P ARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND THEREFORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARE D BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT DID NOT OFFER ANY 3 EXPLANATION NOR FURNISH ANY PARTICULARS TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSEES CASE . THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. IN THIS SITUATION, WE DO NOT FIND MUC H STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR AND THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, WE ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFOR E THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2020 . SD/ - SD/ - (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2020 OKK COPY TO: - 1) SRI KONDALA RAO KURMAYAGARI, H.NO.5 - 3 - 92, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD - 500072. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(5), 10 TH FLOOR, SIGNATURE TOWERS, OPP. BOTANICAL GARDEN, SHERLINGAMPALLY, HYDERABAD - 500 084. 3) THE CIT(A) - 1 , HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 5 , HYDERABAD 4 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE