Shri Sailesh Karmakar, Keonjhar V. ITO, Keonjhar Ward, Keonjhar

ITA 92/CTK/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8746 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K SARANGI
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

P A G E 1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 9 2 /CTK/201 9 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 13 - 14 SHRI SAILESH KARMAKAR , PROP. TRADERS INDIA, MAIN ROAD, BARBIL, KEONJHAR. VS. ITO, KEONJHAR, WARD, KEONJHAR PAN/GIR NO. AMVPK 5471 E (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.K.SARANGI, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI SUBHENDU DUTTA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 03 / 0 4 / 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03 / 0 4 / 201 9 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) , CUTTACK DATED 25.1.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14. 2. THE SHORT ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), CUTTACK WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRMING THE ADDITIO N OF RS.6,72,000/ - . P A G E 2 | 3 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE LD CIT(A) AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING BY ISSUING NOTICES DATED 27.9.2018, 26.10.2018 , 27.11.2018 & 10.1.2018. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MALAFIDE AND NON - APPEARANCE WAS DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSESSEE. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GR ANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD D.R. DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO RESTORING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A). 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, I FIND THAT LD CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EXPARTE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON. THUS, THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) IS A NON - SPEAKING ORDER AND, THEREFORE, AS PRAYED BY LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, I CONSIDER IT PROPER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THAT THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. I ALSO OBSERVE THAT NO HARM WILL BE CAUSED TO THE REVENUE, IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE . I, P A G E 3 | 3 THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) AN D REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. OR DER PRONOUNCED ON 03 / 0 4 /201 9 . SD/ - ( CHANDRA MOHAN GARG ) JUDICIALMEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 03 / 0 4 /20 9 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY, ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : SHRI SAILESH KARMAKAR, PROP. TRADERS INDIA, MAIN ROAD, BARBIL, KEONJHAR 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, KEONJHAR, WARD, KEONJHAR 3. THE CIT(A) , CUTTACK 4. PR.CIT - CUTTACK 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//