M/S RAM DASS KAPOOR vs. COMM. OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAWAN RISHI NAGAR LUDHIANA

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 13.12.2012 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench “A”, Chandigarh (hereinafter GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.09.03 14:46 integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh -2- referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 218/CHD/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08 claiming the following substantial questions of law:- I. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in disposing off the statutory appeal vide order dated 13.12.2012 while rejecting application filed by the counsel for adjournment on medical grounds thereby confirming the order of authorities below without appreciating the facts and evidence on record in its true letter and spirits and thereby denying opportunity of hearing? II. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in disposing off the Misc. Application vide order dated 10.06.2013 thereby dismissing the prayer for recalling the original order for hearing and adjudicating the issue at the stage of prayer for recall itself thus depriving the appellant from opportunity of hearing? III. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by ITAT being devoid of proper appreciation of facts, evidences and well settled law is perverse and deserves to be set aside? IV. Whether under the facts and circumstances of GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.09.03 14:46 integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh -3- the case, the disallowance made by ITAT and authorities below in the case of trade creditors deserves to be deleted? V. Whether the finding of the Tribunal is perverse on facts and its opinion is unsustainable in law and the order of the Tribunal is legally unsustainable and bad in law and the ITAT has mi irected itself in being influenced by irrelevant factors and applying erroneous criteria while deciding the issue under Income Tax Act, 1961?

The facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The assessee is engaged in transportation and LPG Bulk Carrier and filed its return for the assessment year 2007-08 on 30.10.2007 at an income of ` 5,53,316/-. The said return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and taken up for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 29.12.2009 (Annexure A-1) made disallowance of ` 14,32,297/- in the hands of the assessee firm. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who vide order dated 29.12.2010 (Annexure A-2) partly allowed the appeal. Still not satisfied, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 13.12.2012 (Annexure A-3) dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the assessee filed an application under Section 254 of the Act for rectification of the order (Annexure A-3). The Tribunal vide order dated 10.6.2013 (Annexure A-4) dismissed the said application. Hence, the present appeal. GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.09.03 14:46 integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh -4-

Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that on 5.12.2012, the counsel before the Tribunal was suffering from fever and application for adjournment was filed. However, the Tribunal vide order 13.12.2012 decided the matter exparte against the assessee. Learned counsel further submitted that the assessee had a good prima facie case on merits and prayed that the Tribunal be directed to decide the matter on merits after hearing the assessee or its counsel.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue supported the order passed by the Tribunal.

The counsel for the appellant was suffering from fever and had prayed for adjournment on that count. In such circumstances, the prayer for adjournment could not be held to be unjustified. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the order dated 13.12.2012 (Annexure A-3) as well as order dated 17.5.2013 (Annexure A-4) passed by the Tribunal are set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. The substantial questions of law are answered accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 25, 2014 (FATEH DEEP SINGH) gbs JUDGE GURBACHAN SINGH 2014.09.03 14:46 integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh