Shivaram Shetty, V. Income Tax Officer, Hassan

MA 146/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5290 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A R V SRINIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: CHANDRASHEKAR V

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-C BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [ M P NO. 146 /B/2016 (IN ITA NO.547/B/2012)] (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 03 - 04 ) SHR I. M. L. SHIVARAM SETTY, PROP. MARUTHI BANKERS, GOKULA, HOSPITAL ROAD, ARKALGUD -573102. PAN: A CKPS8538B APPLICANT VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, HASSAN . RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI. CHANDRASHEKAR V , ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI. A. R. V. SRINIVASAN , JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 / 02 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 / 02 /201 7 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E POINTING OUT CERTAIN MISTAKES IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 26 .08.2016 IN ITA NO. 547/B/2012 FOR AY 2003-04. IT WAS SUBMITTE D IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION THAT IN COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, IT WAS GIVEN TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF THE ASSESSEE SUCCEE DS ON LEGAL ISSUE THEN THERE WILL NO NECESSITY FOR THE TRIBUNAL TO ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS ON MERITS BUT IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS ON LEGAL ISSUE, THEN THE ASSESSEE WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO ARGUE ON MERITS. BUT AS PER THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE LEGAL ISSUE S WERE DECIDED [MP NO. 146/B/2016 (IN ITA NO.547/B/2012)] PAGE 2 OF 3 AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER, INSTEAD OF GIV ING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE ARGUMENTS ON ME RITS OF THE ISSUE, IT WAS HELD THAT THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ARGUMENTS ON THE MERIT OF THE ISSUE AND THEREFORE, IT WAS INFORMED THAT THE GROUNDS ARE TREATED AS NOT PRESSE D. 2. IN COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE ME, THE LEARNED AR O F THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAME CONTENTIONS WHICH WERE RAISED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION AS NOTED ABOVE. HE SUBM ITTED THAT UNDER THESE FACTS, THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER MAY BE RECALLED FOR A DECISION ON MERIT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE L EARNED DR THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION THAT THIS UNDERSTANDING WAS GIVEN BY THE BENCH IN THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL THAT IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS ON LEGAL ISSU E, THEN AN OPPORTUNITY WILL BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ARGUM ENT ON MERITS AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I FIND THAT IN PARA 11 OF THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER, IT IS STATED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ANY ARG UMENT ON THE MERIT OF THE ISSUE RAISED AND THEREFORE, SUCH GROUN DS ARE TREATED AS NOT PRESSED. UNDER THESE FACTS, I FEEL IT APPRO PRIATE THAT THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER SHOULD BE RECALLED FOR THE LIMITED [MP NO. 146/B/2016 (IN ITA NO.547/B/2012)] PAGE 3 OF 3 PURPOSES OF DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERIT. ACCORDING LY, I RECALL THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERIT AND THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 23.03.2017. THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF H EARING AFTER COMPLETION OF HEARING. SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : BANGALORE DATED : 10/02/2017 /NS/ COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE