M/s Vijol Biotech,, Bangalore v. ITO,, Solan

ITA 121/CHANDI/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 12121514 RSA 2010
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 121/CHANDI/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant M/s Vijol Biotech,, Bangalore
Respondent ITO,, Solan
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 27-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 20-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 20-07-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 29-01-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: B BENCH: CH ANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D K SRIVASTAVA AM AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWL A JM ITA NO. 121/CHANDI/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S VIJOL BIOTECH NALAGARH V. I.T.O. WARD 2 S OLAN C/O SMT. SHEFALI VIG 6 SHANTI NIKETAN SATYANARAYANA ROAD KAMAKSHIPALAYA BANGLORE 560 079 APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAVISH SOOD RESPONDENT BY: SMT. JAISHREE SHARMA ORDER D K SRIVASTAVA: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON 30.11.2009. APART FROM TAKING SEVERAL GROUNDS CHALLENGING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A SPECIFIC GROUND OF APPEAL NAMELY GROUND NO. 5 IN WHICH IT IS STATED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED UPON ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BEFORE HIM BY WHICH THE VERY ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE AO WAS CHALLENGE D. GROUND NO. 5 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US READS AS UNDER:- 5 THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID THE LD. CIT(A) HAD EVEN OTHERWISE GRAVELY ERRED IN LAW IN NOT ADJUDICATING ALL THE G ROUNDS OF APPEAL AS HAD BEEN RAISED BEFORE HER THEREIN CHALLENGING THE VERY ASS UMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE AO. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRE SENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 TAKEN BEFORE T HE LD. CIT(A) WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 2 THAT THE AO HAD GRAVELY ERRED IN LAW IN ASSUMING JURISDICTION AND THEREIN FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT WITHOUT EF FECTING ANY VALID SERVICE OF NOTICE WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD AS STANDS CO NTEMPLATED U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT. 3. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID EVEN O THERWISE THE AO HAD GRAVELY ERRED IN LAW IN NOT EFFECTING SERVICE OF NOTICE A S PER THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW AS STANDS CONTEMPLATED IN THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 R.W. THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (5 OF 1908). 3. IT WAS STATED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THAT THE LD . CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED UPON THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THEREFORE THE M ATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN CONFORMITY WITH LAW. 4. IN REPLY THE LD. DR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE WA S NOTHING IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) TO SHOW THAT HE HAS DISPOSED OFF THE AFORESAID GROU NDS OF APPEAL SPECIFICALLY TAKEN BEFORE HIM AND THEREFORE THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION IN THIS BEHALF IN CONFORMITY WITH LAW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY CON SIDERED THEIR SUBMISSIONS. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED UPON THE ISSUE SPECI FICALLY RAISED BEFORE HIM CHALLENGING THE ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE AO. GROUND N OS. 2 AND 3 TAKEN BEFORE THE LD. .M/S VIJOL BIOTECH NALAGARH V. I.T.O. W-2 S OLAN ITA NO. 12 1/CHANDI/2010 2 CIT(A) WERE SPECIFIC IN THAT THE VERY SERVICE OF NO TICE U/S 143 WAS CHALLENGED. IT WAS THEREFORE INCUMBENT UPON THE LD. CIT(A) TO ADJUDICA TE UPON GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 TAKEN BEFORE HIM. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER IT IS CONS IDERED APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN CONFORMITY WITH LAW INCLUDING GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 T AKEN BEFORE HIM. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHAL L BE GIVEN TO BOTH THE PARTIES. APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 27 JULY 2011 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (D K SRIVA STAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEM BER CHANDIGARH: THE 27 JULY 2011 SURESH COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT M/S VIJOL BIOTECH 2. THE RESPONDENT I.T.O. WARD -2 SOLAN 3. THE CIT(A) SHIMLA 4. THE LD. CIT SHIMLA 5. THE D.R INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT CHANDIGARH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH