Lakshminarayan Kakani , Hyderabad v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Hyderabad

ITA 1168/Hyd/2019 | 2016-2017
Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2019 | Result: Partly Allowed

Our System has flagged this appeal as eligible for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. If you are party to this appeal, get on a Free Consultation Call with our team of Legal Experts who shall guide you as to how you can save huge Interest and Penalty in VSV Scheme.


Apply Now
        
Try VSV Calculator

Appeal Details

RSA Number 116822514 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AAAHL6207Q
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1168/Hyd/2019
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant Lakshminarayan Kakani , Hyderabad
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 06-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB-A
Tribunal Order Date 06-11-2019
Date Of Final Hearing 06-11-2019
Next Hearing Date 06-11-2019
Last Hearing Date 11-09-2019
First Hearing Date 11-09-2019
Assessment Year 2016-2017
Appeal Filed On 19-07-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A - SMC HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1168/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016 - 17 SRI LAKSHMINARAYAN KAKA N I FLAT NO. 610 6 TH FLOOR BABUKHAN ESTATE BASHEERBAGH HYDERABAD - 01. PAN: AAAHL 6207 Q VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 7(3) SIGNATURE TOWERS KONDAPUR HYDERABAD - 084. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI A.V. RAGHURAM REVENUE BY: SRI MOOKAMBIKEYAN DR DATE OF HEARING: 06/11/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06 /11/2019 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 3 HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO.10213/ITO - 7(3)/HYD/CIT(A) - 3/ 2 018 - 19 DATED 20/05/2019 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2016 - 17. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL: - 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON - APPEARANCE IS NOT ONLY ERRONEOUS BOTH O N FACTS AND IN LAW BUT IS PERVERSE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE VERIFI8ED SERVICE OF HEARING NOTICES BEFORE HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND THEREBY ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. 2 3. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRE CIATE THAT EVEN WHEN APPEAL IS DECIDED EX - PARTE IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE GROUNDS WITH REFERENCE TO THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND THEREBY ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT VERIFYING THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE A.O. HAS HELD THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 77 02 51 912 IS NOT SHOWN AS PURCHASES / SALES OF THE TRANSACTION OR OFFERED ANY CAPITAL GAIN THOUGH STATES THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT WHICH CONTAINED THE ABOVE AMOUNT AS PURCHASES AND ARRIVING OF PROFIT IS THERE IN THAT STATEMENT THUS ERRED IN DISMISSED THE APPEAL HOLDING THE ORDER OF THE A.O. TO BE CORRECT. 3. AT THE OUTSET THE LD. AR BRIEFLY NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUT PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE THE APPEAL . LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. AS WELL AS LD . CIT (A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS IN ORDER AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY B E DISMISSED. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE I FIND MERIT IN 3 THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATES OF HEARING. THEREFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE EVEN BEFORE THE LD. A.O. IN THIS SITUATION I DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL A FRESH ON MERITS BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH I ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO P ASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06 TH NOVEMBER 2019. SD/ - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD DATED: 06 TH NOVEMBER 2019 OKK 4 COPY TO: - 1) SRI LAKSHMINARAYAN KAKANI FLAT NO.610 6 TH FLOOR BABUKHAN ESTATE BASHEERBAGH HYDERABAD 500 001. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 7(3) SIGNATURE TOWERS KONDAPUR HYDERABAD 084. 3) THE CIT(A) - 3 HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 3 HYDERABAD 5) THE DR ITAT HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE