Smt. Rama Bhandari, Indore V. The ITO 5(2), Indore

ITA 894/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0645 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.P.MOURYA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 5(2)

Judgement Text

SMT. RAMA BHANDARI 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.894/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016-17 SM T. RAMA BHANDARI, INDORE / VS. I.T.O. 5(2) INDORE ( APPELLANT ) ( REVENUE ) P.A. NO. CGBPB4925 J APPELLANT BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI R.P. M OURYA , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 08.06.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08.06.2020 / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. CIT(A)-II, INDORE DATED 08.07.2019. THE ASSESSEE HA S RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1.THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING EX PARTE APPEAL ORDER. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IN A HASTE, VINDICTIVELY PAS SED THE ORDER DUE TO NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATES OF HEARING. 3. THAT THE A IS A POSSESSION OF DEED AND BANK ST ATEMENT SMT. RAMA BHANDARI 2 (SPECIFIED IN POINT 6 & 7 OF STATEMENT OF FACTS) WH ICH ARE QUITE SUFFICIENT TO ENCOUNTER THE ADDITIONS MADE BY AO AN D CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A), THEREFORE IT IS PRAYED THAT IN THE N ATURAL JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF PROVING THE CASE MAY PLEASE BE PROVIDED TO THE A AND THE CASE PLEASE BE REMANDED . 4. IN THE CASE-GUJARAT THEMIS BIOSYN LTD. VS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL, AUG,20, 1999 IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT CIT(A) COULD N OT DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION SIMPLY BECAUSE ASSES SEE HAD FAILED TO PUT IN AN APPEARANCE ON THE VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING; IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFRESH. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE US. HOWEVER, THE CASE HAS BEEN HE ARD WITH THE HELP OF LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND SUBMISS IONS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS CONTENDED THAT NO PROPER AND MEANIN GFUL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSE E BY THE LD. CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT ON 30.05.2019, 18.06.2019 & 05.07.2019, HE WAS INFORMED THAT LD. CIT(A) WOULD N OT BE ATTENDING THE OFFICE ON THESE DAYS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE COUNSEL HIMSELF HAD GONE TO THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) AN D FOUND THAT LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYED THAT LD. CIT(A) MAY BE DIRECTED IN THIS REGARD. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR OPPOSED THESE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE. SMT. RAMA BHANDARI 3 HOWEVER, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE WILL HAVE NO OBJECTION IF MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR DE CISION ON MERIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE, THE ASSESSEES MATTER IS LIABLE TO BE RECONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT( A). ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTO RED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) IS HEREBY DI RECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER LAW AND THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE/APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGAR D. 4. IN RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08.06 .2020. SD/- (MANISH BORAD) SD/- (KUL BHARAT) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER INDORE; DATED : 08/06/2020 PATEL/PS SMT. RAMA BHANDARI 4 COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUAR D FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INDORE