GUPTA INTERNATIONAL SHIV NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KARNAL

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh.

Date of Decision: 27.01.2009 Gupta International

....Appellant. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal ....Respondent.

Coram:- Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.S. Khehar Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh Present: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the respondent.

... J.S. Khehar, J. (Oral). The solitary contention of the learned counsel for the appellant before us today was, that the appellant was proceeded against ex-parte before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and that, the controversy be relegated back to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, to be disposed of on merits. In this behalf, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, that the appellant is ready and willing to bear the costs for not appearing before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

We have heard the learned counsel for the respondent. The solitary contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is, that on the proposition of law (adjudicated upon in the impugned order dated 25.4.2008 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) stands settled by this Court, and that, no useful purpose would be served by relegating the parties back to the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent is refuted by the learned counsel for the appellant. He states that the real issues canvassed on behalf of the appellant could not be considered on account of absence of representation. In the peculiar facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, we are satisfied that the instant appeal deserves to be allowed. The order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25.4.2008 is, accordingly, set aside. The parties are relegated back to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The parties shall appear before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 26.2.2009. In view of the fact, that the appellant has been responsible for requiring the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the main appeal for the second time, we are satisfied that the appellant should pay costs to the respondent. Accordingly, the appellant is directed to pay a sum of Rs.11,000/- as costs. The aforesaid costs shall be deposited with the Assessing Officer within one week from today. If the aforesaid costs are not deposited with the Assessing Officer within the time stipulated hereinabove, the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25.4.2008 shall be deemed to have revived automatically. It needs to be clarified, that the acceptance of the instant appeal should not be treated as a determination of the controversy on merits by this Court. The instant appeal has merely been allowed on technicality, so as to enable the appellant to agitate his claim on merits, before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ( J.S. Khehar ) Judge ( Nawab Singh ) Judge. 27.01.2009 sk.