Smt. Radha Sharma, Bhopal V. The ACIT 1(2), Bhopal

ITSSA 43/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5090 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2018
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALCHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: N D PATWA S
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

SHYAM NATH SHARMA & SMT. RADHA SHARMA (SS) 122 & 123 OF 2016 AND (SS) 43 OF 2013 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NOS122 & 123/IND/2016 A.YS. 2004-05 & 2006-07 SHYAM NATH SHARMA, BHOPAL :: APPELLANT VS ACIT-1(2), BHOPAL :: RESPONDENT IT(SS)A NO. 43/IND/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 SMT. RADHA SHARMA, BHOPAL PAN BCOPS 9823 C :: APPELLANT VS ACIT-1(2), BHOPAL :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEES BY SHRI ASHISH GOYAL AND SHRI N.D. PATWA, ADVOCATES RESPONDENT BY SHRI LAL CHAND, CIT DATE OF HEARING 15.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.10.2018 O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ABOVE ASSESSE ES AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A)-I, BHOPAL DATED 31.3 .2016, 31.3.2016 & 17.12.2012, RESPECTIVELY. SHYAM NATH SHARMA & SMT. RADHA SHARMA (SS) 122 & 123 OF 2016 AND (SS) 43 OF 2013 2 IT(SS)A NOS.122 & 123/IND/2016 (SHYAM NATH SHARMA) 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT LD. CIT(A) VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS NO PROPER, REASONABLE AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY WAS P ROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT MAKE EXAMINATION ON MERITS OF THE CASE IN SPEAKING WAY AND PASSED THE E XPARTE IMPUGNED ORDERS. THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYED THAT LD. CIT(A) MA Y BE DIRECTED TO PASS THE ORDERS ON MERITS IN DETAIL. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. CIT/DR DID NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMI TTED THAT APPEALS WERE DECIDED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THE COPY OF REMAN D REPORT HAD TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE SO THAT HE COULD GIVE HIS REJ OINDER TO THE SAME. HOWEVER, NOTICES SENT TO ASSESSEE WERE RECEIVED BAC K FROM THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT. THUS, THE APPEALS WERE DECIDED IN EXPAR TE MANNER. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT IN THE INSTANT APPEALS, T HE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN THE COPY OF REMAND REPORT AND AS SUCH, HIS RE JOINDER TO THE REMAND REPORT COULD NOT BE FILED AS NOTICES SENT TO ASSESSEE WERE RECEIVED BACK FROM THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE OPPORTUNITY OF FILING REJOINDER OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE REMAND REPORT WAS REQUIRED BEFORE TAKING ANY DECISION. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED PAPER BOOKS RUNNING INTO 288 PAGES ALONG WITH SYNOP SIS OF ARGUMENTS, SHYAM NATH SHARMA & SMT. RADHA SHARMA (SS) 122 & 123 OF 2016 AND (SS) 43 OF 2013 3 WHEREIN THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN ANNEXED, W HICH HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHI LE DECIDING THE APPEALS. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE APPEALS ARE REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH DIRECTION TO CONSID ER THE SUBMISSIONS/RELEVANT PAPERS. THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD DECIDE THE APPEALS ON MERITS IN TERMS AS INDICATED ABOVE AFTER AFFORDI NG DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER LAW AND THE ASS ESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE/APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A) IN T HIS REGARD. ACCORDINGLY, APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT(SS)A NO.43/IND/2013 (SMT. RADHA SHARMA) 4. BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND IS SUE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE ARE INTERLINKED WITH THE CASE OF SHYAM NATH SH ARMA AND AS SUCH, THE DECISION TAKEN IN THE CASE OF SHYAM NATH SHARMA WILL HAVE BEARING ON THE CASE OF SMT. RADHA SHARMA, THEREFORE, THIS C ASE MAY ALSO BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS CASE TOO AND RE MAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO RECONSIDER THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID DECISION IN TERMS AS INDICATED H EREINABOVE. SHYAM NATH SHARMA & SMT. RADHA SHARMA (SS) 122 & 123 OF 2016 AND (SS) 43 OF 2013 4 5. FINALLY, THESE THREE APPEALS OF ASSESSEES ARE AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.10.201 8. SD/- ( MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17.10.2018 !V..S! COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PR.CIT(A)/PR.CIT/DR, INDORE