Harakchand V.Shah, Pune V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 2, Pune

ITA 94/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2131 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM ITA No. 93 and 94/PUN/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 Harakchand V. Shah Sardar Sahaniwas, Apte Road, Erandawane, Pune-411 005 PAN; AHYPS 4476 R Appellant Vs. The Asstt. CIT Cir.2 Pune. Respondent Appellant by : Shri A.R. Bhide Respondent by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of Hearing : 26-07-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28-07-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM These appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the common order of the ld. CIT(A)-13, Pune, dated 19-11-2018 for A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014- 15 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. That on perusal of grounds of appeal, ground No. 1 is that the assessee is aggrieved that the ld. CIT(A) has not followed the principles of natural justice while disallowing the issue of addition u/s 14A of the Act. Both the parties herein agreed that the facts and circumstances and the issues involved in both these appeals are identical and therefore, these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this consolidated order. 3. We would first take up ITA NO. 93/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14 which is the lead case. We find that in the common order passed by the ld. CIT(A) for both these assessments years it is an ex parte order where the rights and liabilities of the parties have not been deliberated. The CIT(A) has given several opportunities to the assessee for hearing as appearing in para 1.4 of 2 ITA No. 93 & 94/PUN/2019 Harakchand V. Shah A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 his order. The assessee has neither attended nor filed any written submissions in pursuance of his appeal. The ld. CIT(A) has relied on statement of facts, grounds of appeal and assessment order. Thus, there has not been substantive representation by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). We are also of the considered view that principles of natural justice was followed by the ld. CIT(A) since he has provided ample opportunities to the assessee to represent his case on merits. However, the assessee for some reasons best known to him has not availed of these opportunities of hearing dates and has evaded from the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). However, the income-tax Act is welfare legislation and in that regard, we are of the considered view that one final opportunity should be given to the assessee to represent his case on merits before the ld. CIT(A). Even the ld. A.R prayed before us if this opportunity is given, they would represent substantially on merits before the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documents/evidences. The ld. D.R did not raise any objection if the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication as per law. 4. Having heard the parties and in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file to re-adjudicate as per law. We also direct the assessee to remain present before the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documents/evidences for proper representation of his case immediately on receipt of the hearing notice. The appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 93/PUN/2019 is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Since the issues except the amount involved in ITA No. 94/PUN/2019 are identical and similar, our decision in ITA No. 93/PUN/2019 shall apply mutatis mutandis to I.T.A. No. 94/PUN/2019. Therefore, ITA No. 94/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2014-15 is also allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No. 93 & 94/PUN/2019 Harakchand V. Shah A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. In the combined result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28 th day of July 2022. Sd/- sd/- (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune; Dated, this 28 th day of July 2022 Ankam Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT (A)-13, Pune. 3. The Pr. CIT 2, Pune 4. The D.R. ITAT A’ Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File BY ORDER, Sr. Private Secretary /// TRUE COPY /// ITAT, Pune. 4 ITA No. 93 & 94/PUN/2019 Harakchand V. Shah A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Date 1 Draft dictated on 26-07-2022 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 27-07-2022 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed and placed before the second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by second Member AM/JM 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr. PS Sr.PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr.PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order