Sh. Parmod Gupta, Ropar V. ITO, Ropar

ITA 901/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6842 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDER KANTASR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 901/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI PARMOD GUPTA, VS. THE ITO, PROP. M/S PABULAR & GABBLES CO., WARD 2(2), # 1665, PARTAP BAZAR, ROPAR. ROPAR. PAN NO. AARPG6172C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH,ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA,SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 11.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.09.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2017 OF LD.CIT (APPE ALS) AMRITSAR CAMP CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS INCLUDING GROUND NO. 1 WHICH READS AS UNDER : THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HA S ERRED IN LAW IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT AFFORDING A PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPALS OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND AS SUCH THE ORDER PASSED IS ILL EGAL, ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED WHICH MERITS ANNULMENT. 2. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE EX-PARTE ORDER SU BMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED ON THE GROUND OF NON- REPRESENTATION. RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320, IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF C IT(A) GRANTING ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. RELIANCE WAS PLACE D UPON DECISION OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCHES IN THE CASE OF SHRI LO VLESH KUMAR V ITO, PANCHKULA ITA 325/CHD/2012 DATED 11.05.2012. THE LD. AR GAVE HIS ORAL UNDERTAKING THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY, THE ISSU E IS RESTORED, THE ASSESSEE SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE T HE CIT(A). THE LD. SR.DR IN THE PECULIAR FACTS HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE IS RESTORED. ITA 901/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT THE SOLE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS THE P ASSING OF AN EX- PARTE ORDER BY THE LD. CIT(A) DUE TO THE NON ATTENDANC E OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE LD. AR HAS STATED THAT HE MAY NOT BE READILY ABLE TO ADDRESS THE REASON FOR NON- REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE CIT(A), HOWEVER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ORDER PASSED CANNOT BE SAID TO BE A SPEAKING ORDER AS THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE CIT(A) MANDATE THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL, THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS REQUIRED TO SET OUT THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND THE REASONS FOR CONCURRING OR REJECTIO N OF THE GROUNDS. I FIND THAT CIT(A) IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS FAILED TO FOL LOW THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AS LAID DOWN IN SECTION 250(6 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE RAIS ED BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER AFTER ALLOWING REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, BEING OF THE VIE W THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER CANNOT BE UPHELD NOT ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT IT IS AN EX- PARTE ORDER BUT EVEN OTHERWISE, IT DOES NOT MEET THE S TATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AS SET OUT IN SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250 OF INCOME TAX ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUE IS SET ASIDE WITH THE AFORESAID DIRECTION. AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT OPPORTUNITY SO PROVID ED, IT IS HOPED, IS NOT ABUSED BY THE ASSESSEE AS IN THE EVENTUALITY OF A BUSE OF THE SAME, THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS THE SPEAKING ORD ER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THUS, IT IS HOPED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTEREST MAKES FULL AND PROPER COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORIT Y. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH SEPT., 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.