Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD ‘A’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD
IT(SS)A Nos. 112 to 116/Ahd/2015 Smt. Shardaben Shankarji Thakor vs. DCIT A.Y. 2005-06 to 2009-10 & 2011-12 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD ‘A’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Mahavir Prasad JM] IT(SS)A Nos. 112 to 116 /Ahd/2015 Assessment Year : 2005-06 to 2009-10 Shardaben Shankarji Thakor …...…..………Appellant Sharda Nivas, Nano Thakorvas, Ambali Gam, Bopal, Ahmedabad [PAN : AEXPT 0449 P] Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad
ITA No. 1002/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashokji Chanduji Thakor …...…..………Appellant Chandanmani Niwas, Thakorvas, Ambali Gam, Ahmedabad [PAN : ADTPT 4434 D] Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad
ITA No.1003/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Rohitji Chanduji Thakor …...…..………Appellant Prop: Sharda Enterprises, Chandanmani Niwas, Thakorvas, Ambali Gam, Ahmedabad [PAN : ADTPT 4435 C] Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad
Appearances by:
Aseem Thakkar for the appellant Umashankar Prasad for the respondent
IT(SS)A Nos. 112 to 116/Ahd/2015 Smt. Shardaben Shankarji Thakor vs. DCIT A.Y. 2005-06 to 2009-10 & 2011-12 Page 2 of 3 Date of concluding the hearing: 26.12.2017 Date of pronouncing the order: 27.12.2017
O R D E R Per Bench : 1. By way of these seven appeals, the assessee-appellant(s) has challenged the correctness of the ex-parte orders, all dated 09.01.2015, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad in the matter of assessment under section 153A r.w.s 144 / 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2009-10 & 2011-12.
When these appeals were called out for hearing, it was noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed the impugned orders ex-parte, inter alia, on the ground that the assessee did not respond to the notices of hearing issued by the learned CIT(A) and the assessee did not even file the statement of facts along with the appeal memo. On perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that the last date of hearing fixed by the learned CIT(A) was on 05.12.2014 and the hearing was scheduled on 17.12.2014. Clearly, therefore, the notice for hearing was given less than even 10 days before the scheduled date of hearing. As for the CIT(A)’s observations about statement of facts, we have noticed that the assessee was not specifically put to notice in this regard and thus, the assessee did not have any effective opportunity for making up this deficiency. In any case, when it was put to the Departmental Representative whether he has any objection to the matter being remitted to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, he did not have much to say, but left the matter to the bench. Shri Aseem Thakkar, learned counsel for the assessee has assured us that, on the matter being remitted to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication de novo, he will ensure strict compliance with the notice of hearing and that the remanded proceedings are expeditiously completed.
In view of these discussions and bearing in mind entirety of the case, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication de novo, after reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, by way of speaking order and in accordance with the law. The assessee is also directed to ensure proper compliance with the notice of hearing by the learned CIT(A), failing which the CIT(A) will be at liberty to dispose of the matter on the basis of the material on record.
In the result, all appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open Court today on this 27th day of December, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
Mahavir Prasad Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 27th day of December, 2017 **bt*
IT(SS)A Nos. 112 to 116/Ahd/2015 Smt. Shardaben Shankarji Thakor vs. DCIT A.Y. 2005-06 to 2009-10 & 2011-12 Page 3 of 3
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order