Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: AND RAJESH KUMAR
O R D E R Per Bench to 47/CTK/2023 are filed by the assessee ITA No.45 to 47/CTK/2023 are filed by the assessee ITA No.45 to 47/CTK/2023 are filed by the assessee against the separate orders all dated 20.12.2022 of ld CIT(A), against the separate orders all dated 20.12.2022 of ld CIT(A), against the separate orders all dated 20.12.2022 of ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 2010 NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012 11 to 2012-13 and ITA Nos.48 & ITA Nos.48 & 49/CTK/2023 are filed by the assessee against the 49/CTK/2023 are filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 20.12.2022 for the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 20.12.2022 for the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 20.12.2022 for the assessment year 2018 assessment year 2018-19.
In these cases, adjournment petitions have been filed by In these cases, adjournment petitions have been filed by In these cases, adjournment petitions have been filed by the ld A.R. of the assessee. The explanation given in the the ld A.R. of the assessee. The explanation given in the the ld A.R. of the assessee. The explanation given in the P a g e 1 | 3
I T A N o . 4 5 / C T K / 2 0 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 0 - 1 1 I T A N o . 4 6 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 I T A N o . 4 7 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 2 - 1 3 I T A N o . 4 8 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 8 - 1 9 I T A N o . 4 9 / C T K / 2 0 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 8 - 1 9 adjournment petitions is not acceptable and hence, same are rejected and the appeals are disposed of after hearing both the sides.
Shri B.N. Behera, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that in all these appeals, the ld CIT(A) has passed order without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing. It was his submission that if one more opportunity is allowed, the assessee would furnish the submission and required documents before the ld CIT(A) and co-operate with set aside proceedings.
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that several opportunities have been afforded to the assessee but the assessee failed miserably to file the documents. Hence, no purpose would be served if the matter is restored to the file of the ld CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned orders clearly show that the ld CIT(A) has afforded several opportunities at the request of the assessee to furnish the details/documents for disposal of the appeals. We also find that the ld CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeals without considering the case on merits. Before us, it was the prayer of ld A.R of the assessee to allow one more opportunity. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we consider it fair and reasonably that one more
P a g e 2 | 3
I T A N o . 4 5 / C T K / 2 0 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 0 - 1 1 I T A N o . 4 6 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 I T A N o . 4 7 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 2 - 1 3 I T A N o . 4 8 / C T K / 2 0 2 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 8 - 1 9 I T A N o . 4 9 / C T K / 2 0 2 3 : A s s e s s m e n t Y e a r s : 2 0 1 8 - 1 9 opportunity be provided to the assessee to represent its case before the ld CIT(A) and accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the ld CIT(A) and restore the matter to his files who shall decide the same afresh as per law and after providing reasonably opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices of the ld CIT(A) for fresh set aside proceedings and furnish the relevant documents/evidences, as deem necessary.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 27/06/2023. SD/- SD/- (Rajesh Kumar) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 27/06/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Nisha Properties & Development Limited, AM-44, Basanti Colony, Rourkela 2. The Respondent: ITO(NFAC), Rourkela 3. The CIT(A)-,NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//