Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.06.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jalandhar, in respect of Assessment Year 2011-12, arising out of the Manjit Singh v. ITO Assessment Order dated 27.11.2018 of the Income Tax Officer, Ward- Nawanshehar.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the learned CIT (A) has erred in uploading the order of A.O framed u/s 143(3) is against the facts & law & deservers to be annulled. 2. That learned CIT (A) has erred in not deciding the appeal of the appellant on merits as the specific ground has been taken in grounds of appeal no. 3 & 4 and written arguments has been filed and the A.O has filed comments on the same.
3. That the learned CIT (A) has erred in not considering the written submissions of the appellant filed during the course of appellate proceeding on merits and on law.
4. Fund Flow statement admitted by CIT (A) but no credit of agricultural income given IN THE Assessment Order.
5. No reasonable opportunity of being heard has been afforded to the assessee. Notice for hearing been issued for 19-06-2018 which has been received by the assessee on 19-06-2019 and the matter has been decided on 20/06/2019.
6. Additions made by the A.O and confirmed by the learned CIT (A) (1) and made kindly be deleted.
7. That assessee may be allowed to take any other ground of appeal with the permission of Honorable Bench.”
None appeared for the assessee. However, after the hearing, the ld. DR, it is decided to hear the appeal on merits in the large interest of justice.
The proposed ground no. 5, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(A) that no reasonable opportunity of being heard has been Manjit Singh v. ITO afforded to the assessee and thus, the appeal was decided ex-parte qua the assessee.
The ld. DR for the department stand by the impugned order and submitted that the appellant assessee has filed additional evidence before the ld. CIT(A) who has called for remand report from the AO on the additional evidence which was confronted to the assessee vide letter dated 14.06.2019 but it was not complied with by the assessee. He argued that it is factually incorrect to state that the assessee was not granted opportunity of being heard.
Having heard the ld. Addl. CIT DR, perusal of the record and the impugned order, it is noted that although the ld. CIT(A) has admitted the additional evidence and called for the remand report from the AO, and that he has confronted the remand report to the assessee but there was mention of factum of rebuttal of remand report to the assessee in the impugned order. Merely, he has endorsed the observation of the AO given in the remand report as such, without taking any rebuttal of the assessee to this remand report which is not justified in the view of the principle of natural justice. It is trite law that no assessee can be condemned unheard, in view of principle of ‘audi alteram partem’. We are of the considered view,
Manjit Singh v. ITO that it is a fit case to be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh after rebuttal of the remand report to the assessee and grating sufficient opportunity of being heard. No doubt, the assessee shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13.10.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr/PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T