Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM
आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A)/VLS/600/16-17/2201, dated 08.01.2018 which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
At the outset, Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) for the Revenue submitted that appeal of assessee is barred by limited by twenty seven (27) days. However, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee had received the order of Ld. CIT(A) physically and considering the date mentioned in the postal envelop as 25.03.2019, there is no delay in filling the appeal. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and observed that ITA.192/SRT/2019/AY.2009-10 Thakorbhai Patel justification given by Ld. Counsel is correct, hence there is no delay in filling the appeal before this Tribunal. Therefore, plea of Ld. DR is hereby rejected.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee could not plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond his control. The Ld. Counsel also stated that in case of assessee’s co-owner, the appeal has been remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, Ld. Counsel contended that an opportunity to plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A), may be granted, to the present assessee.
On the other hand, Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We also note that Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. That is ld. CIT(A) did not pass order on merit based on the material available on record. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
ITA.192/SRT/2019/AY.2009-10 Thakorbhai Patel 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced on 27/04/2023 in the open court.