Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Manoj Patel Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, 314B, Samartha Aangan II Off Mumbai, Piramal Chambers, Vs. KL Walawalkar Road, Andheri Mumbai-20 West, Mumbai-400 053 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AOAPP1898P Assessee by .. Shri Mayur Kisnad, AR .. Shri Suman Kumar, DR Revenue by Date of hearing .. 01-03-2017 .. Date of pronouncement 01-03-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-51, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-31/IT-40/DCIT-20(2)/14-15 dated 22-08-2016. The Assessment was framed by DCIT Circle-20(2), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2011- 12 vide order dated 14-03-2014 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).
At the outset the learned Counsel for the assessee first of all drew our attention to first of the ground of the assessee’s appeal which reads as under: -
“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without granting proper opportunity of hearing.”
We have noticed from the orders of CIT(A) that he has decided the issue almost ex parte vide Para 5 and 6 as under: - “5. The facts of the case as noted above are that the appellant has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities. Accordingly, the appeal is decided.
5.1. I have carefully considered the facts relating to the grounds raised in appeal as they emanate from the impugned order. The appellant was afforded several chances to explain the son for not offering the income on the basis of which the AO has made additions. The appellant has not filed any written submission in this regard nor preferred to appear to explain and pursue his appeal. The appellant has not rebutted the arguments placed by the AO in the assessment order and neither submitted anything contrary to the facts placed in the order of the AO. In the absence of any material, details and argument in this regard, the decision of the AO cannot be faulted.
6. In the view of the case laws cited above and in the absence of any worthwhile explanation and without any credible evidence filed during the appellate proceedings, appeal is decided on merit as well.”
Now, before us the learned Counsel for the assessee filed a complete chronology of notices for hearing received and adjournment sought which is as under: - chronology of notices for hearing received and adjournments sought
Date of Date of Remarks issue of Notice hearing Adjournment letter filed and adjournment 22-12-2015 05-01-2016 granted to 03/02/2016 Received a phone call from CIT (A)'s Office on 02/02/2016 that the hearing on 3.02.2016 is 03/02/2016 adjourned sine die and a fresh notice is being issued Adjournment letter filed and adjournment granted to 08/04/2016 which was not attended as a call was received from CIT (A)'s office on 01.04.2016 02-02-2016 23-02-2016 informing that the hearing of 08.04.2016 is adjourned sine die. A fresh notice dated 01/04/2016 was received fixing hearing on 29/04/2016 Page 2 of 4
Date of Date of Remarks issue of Notice hearing Letter for additional grounds of appeal filed on 26.04.2016. AR appeared. Synopsis was ready but the case was 01-04-2016 29-04-2016 not argued as, with respect, the Learned CIT (A) informally stated that he is on leave for some time and likely to be transferred. Hearing adjourned to 6.06.2016 06-06-2016 Received a phone call from CIT(A)'s Office from Mr. Vijay Kumar adjourning the hearing to 10/06/2016 10-06-2016 Adjournment letter filed asking adjournment to 15/06/2016 or any date convenient thereafter, we were informed that a fresh notice will be issued Adjournment letter filed on 08/08/2016 requesting for a fortnight time which was accepted stating that 08-08-2016 12-07-2016 a fresh notice will be issued. This request was made as the AR was out of the country and returned only on 06/08/2016 (Saturday).
5. We find from the above that there is a reasonable cause for assessee for not attending the hearing and hence, we are of the view that let one more opportunity be allowed to assessee to represent his case before CIT(A). Hence, the order of CIT(A) is set aside and matter is remanded back to him for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 01-03-2017.