M/S GURFATEH FILMS,MOHALI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 50/ASR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 January 2019AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without considering the material on record or providing a proper opportunity of being heard. The case was set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits.

What were the facts?

A search and seizure operation was conducted, and the assessee filed a return of income. The Assessing Officer framed an assessment at a significantly higher income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the material and providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR

Before: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble & Sh. Ravish Sood

For Respondent: Smt. Parvinder Kaur, CIT DR
Hearing: 16.01.2019Pronounced: 17.01.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President and Sh. Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA No.50/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 M/s Gurfateh Films, 4140 Vs DCIT, Sector 68, Mohali Central Circle-II, Jalandhar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKFG9328D

ITA No.51/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Gurfateh Films & Sippy Vs DCIT, Grewal Production Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-II, 1013, Sector 67, Mohali Jalandhar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAECG8982G Assessee by : Sh. Jatinder Sharma, CA Revenue by : Smt. Parvinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 16.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.01.2019

ORDER Per N. K. Saini, Vice President: These two appeals by the assesses are directed against the separate orders each dated 10.11.2017 of CIT( A)-5, Ludhiana. 2. Since the issue involved is common in both these appeals which were heard together so these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

ITA No. 50/Asr./2018 2 ITA No. 51/Asr/2018

3.

The main grievance of the assessee vide ground no. 1 relates to the ex parte order passed by the learned CIT(A) without considering the material on record. The said ground read as under:-

“i. That on the facts and in law, Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-5) Ludhiana erred in summarily and mechanically sustaining the assessment order of Assessing Officer which is arbitrary, contrary to law, equity, justice and facts and material on record, without considering the submissions made before the Assessing Officer.”

4.

Facts of the case in brief are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was carried out on 5.12.2012 and certain incriminating material was found and seized. The assessee filed the return of income on 9.3.2015 declaring an income of Rs. 46,25,000/-. However the assessment was framed by the AO at an income of Rs. 2,29,84,698/- by making the various additions.

5.

Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the learned CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal in lemine by observing that the final opportunity vide notice dated 9.10.2017 for hearing on 23.10.2017 was given to the assessee thereafter the notice was sent for hearing on 8.11.2017 by registered post but none appeared on behalf of the assessee.

6.

Now the assessee is in appeal.

7.

The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) had not considered the relevant material which was already available on the record. It was also submitted that proper opportunity of being heard was not provided by the learned CIT(A).

ITA No. 50/Asr./2018 3 ITA No. 51/Asr/2018

8.

In his rival submissions, the learned DR submitted that the assessee was not cooperative and did not appear whenever the case was listed for hearing. So there was no alternative except to dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution.

9.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte in lemine and had not discussed the issues on merit. It is well setteled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “Audi Alteram Partem”. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The facts involved in ITA No. 51/Asr/2018 are similar to the facts in ITA No. 50/Asr/2018 (supra) therefore, our findings given in the former part of this order shall apply mutatis mutandis for this assesse also.

10.

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 17/01/2019).

Sd/- Sd/- (Ravish Sood) (N. K. Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Dated: 17/01/2019 *SH*

ITA No. 50/Asr./2018 4 ITA No. 51/Asr/2018

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →