Shri Tejas Vinubhai Shah, Ahmedabad V. The DCIT, Central Cir-1(3), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 219/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2848 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMAJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ IT(SS)A NO. 219/AHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SHRI TEJAS VINUBHAI SHAH 48, ALOK BUNGALOW SUN-N-STEP CLUB ROAD THALTEJ, AHMEDABAD. PAN : AHBPS 5069 H VS DCIT, CENT.CIR.1(3) AHMEDABAD. / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASEEM L. THAKKAR, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 29/10/2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01/11/2018 O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)- 11, AHMEDABAD DATED 15.5.2018 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2013-14. 2. IN THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE. 3. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, W E HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE FIND THAT THE LD.CIT(A) H AS LISTED APPEAL FOR HARING ON SIX OCCASIONS. OUT OF THESE SIX OCCASION S, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED IT(SS)A NO.219/AHD/2018 - 2 - ON THREE OCCASIONS AND SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. HOWEVER , ON THE LAST THREE DATES NONE ATTENDED AND THEREFORE THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE . NO DOUBT, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CONDUCTED HIS INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS DILIGENTLY, BUT IT IS PERTIN ENT TO TAKE NOTE THAT SUB- SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250 PROVIDED THAT LD.COMMISS IONER WOULD STATE POINTS IN DISPUTE AND THEREAFTER RECORD REASONS ON THOSE POINTS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONCLUSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) WOULD REVEAL THAT THE LD.CIT(A) WITHOUT CONSIDERING STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD CONCURRED WITH THE AO. THE LD.CIT(A) REPRODUCED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, AND THEREAFTER SIM PLY CONCURRED WITH IT. HENCE, IMPUGNED ORDER IS NOT IN COHERENCE WITH THE MANDATE PROVIDED IN SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORE ALL THE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO CORPORAT E WITH THE LD.CIT(A) AND SHOULD NOT SEEK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST NOVEMBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER