Shri Lal Singh, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer -4(2), Kanpur

ITA 88/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5243 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: O NLY NOTICE MENTIONED
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.87 & 88/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.87 & 88/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 SHRI LAL SINGH, LIG-2112, AVAS VIKAS, KALYANPUR, KANPUR. PAN:ANYPS 7641 G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(2), KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A)-II, KANPUR BOTH D ATED 11/10/2017 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015. 2. AT THE OUTSET LEARNED A.R. STATED THAT LEARNED C IT(A) HAS PASSED THESE ORDERS WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE AND THE O NLY NOTICE MENTIONED BY LEARNED CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYED THAT THE ORDERS OF LEARNED CIT(A) MAY BE REMANDED BACK FOR PASSING THE ORDER ON MERITS. I NOTED THAT LEARNED C IT(A) HAS PASSED EX- PARTE ORDERS AS ACCORDING TO HIM, NOBODY HAS APPEAR ED ON THE DATES WHEN THE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE HIM. FRO M THE ORDER OF CIT(A), IT IS APPARENT THAT THE CIT(A) HAD ISSUED NOTICES ON 2 8/09/2017 FOR COMPLIANCE ON 10/10/2017 AND ON 11/10/2017 PASSED T HE ORDERS WITHOUT APPELLANT BY SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C. A. RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 22/10/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22/10/2018 I.T.A. NO.87 & 88/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. I FEEL THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AS LEAR NED CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEALS ON MERITS. THE PROVISION OF SEC TION 250 WHICH DEALS WITH THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), ALL OWS A RIGHT TO AN ASSESSEE TO BE HEARD AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPE AL. EVEN THE NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED O F WITHOUT BEING HEARD THE PARTY OR WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE PROPER AND SUFF ICIENT OPPORTUNITY. I AM OF THE VIEW FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASES THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS BY THE CIT(A). I, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE A ND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES, SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CIT(A) SHALL REFIX THESE APPEALS AND DECIDE THE APPEALS AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND S UFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND NOT SEEK UNDUE ADJOURNMENT AND CO-OPERATE WITH LEARNED CIT(A) IN D ISPOSING OF THE APPEALS. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/10 /2018) SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:22/10/2018 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW