Sh. Narinder Kumar Bansal, Panchkula V. DCIT, Chandigarh

ITA 868/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8489 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.868/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) SH.NARINDER KUMAR BANSAL, VS. THE D.C.I.T., # 344, MDC, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PANCHKULA. CHANDIGARH. PAN: ABDPB2816K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.02.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.02.2016 O R D E R PER RANO JAIN, A.M . : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS)-3, GURGAON DATED 29.9.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) WAS A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE UNDER SECTI ON 153B(1)(B) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THE CASE TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE 2 OF THE CIT (APPEALS), AS THE CIT (APPEALS) HAS PASS ED AN EX-PARTE ORDER IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE REASON FOR NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT (APPEA LS) WAS STATED TO BE THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE DATE OF HEARING. 3. THE LEARNED D.R. DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO SEND BACK THE CASE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (APPEALS) . 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHO RITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECO RD. ON PERUSAL OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE OBSERVE THAT A NOTICE DATED 24.7.2015 FIXING THE CA SE BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) AS ON 6.8.2015 WAS ISSUED. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER A SKING FOR ADJOURNMENT. ANOTHER NOTICE DATED 11.8.2015 WAS IS SUED TO THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE CASE FOR 24.8.2015. A L ETTER DATED 24.8.2015 WAS SENT BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PO ST STATING THAT SINCE THE COUNSEL IS OUT OF STATION, THE CASE MAY BE ADJOURNED. ANOTHER NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY THE CIT (APPEALS) FIXING THE CASE FOR 8.9.2015, HOWEVER, TH ROUGH HIS LETTER DATED 8.9.2015, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE NOTICE FOR HEARING FIXED ON 8.9.2015 WAS RECEIVED B Y HIM ONLY ON 7.9.2015 AT 3.00 P.M. AND REQUESTED FOR ANO THER ADJOURNMENT. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) WAS PA SSED AS ON 29.9.2015. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSES SEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) AND AN EX -PARTE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE CIT (APPEALS). SINCE THIS IS A 3 CASE OF VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WHEREBY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE GIVEN A PROPER AND ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, WE FIND IT PROPER TO SE ND THE CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (APPEALS) TO ADJUD ICATE THE ISSUES ON MERIT AFTER GIVING ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOP ERATE WITH THE CIT (APPEALS) FOR ADJUDICATION OF APPEAL A ND NOT TO TAKE UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS, WITHOUT THERE BEI NG ANY SUFFICIENT CAUSE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (H.L. KARWA) (RANO JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 10 TH FEBRUARY, 2016 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/THE CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH