Global One India Private Limited, New Delhi v. Dy. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 16/DEL/2009 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1620114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AABCG7725N
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 16/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Global One India Private Limited, New Delhi
Respondent Dy. CIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 10-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 10-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 08-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 08-02-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 05-01-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH : C NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI D.R. SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.16/DEL./2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) GLOBAL ONE INDIA PRIVATE TD. VS. DCIT CIRCLE 12 (1) C-56 NEETI BAGH NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN AABCG7725N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SATYEN SETHI ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI D.N. KAR SR.DR ORDER PER K.D. RANJAN AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04-05 ARISES OUT OF ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XVIII NEW DELHI. 2. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 RELATES TO DISPOSING OF THE A PPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT PROPER SERVING OF NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS CASE TH E AO PASSED ORDER U/S 143(3) ASSESSING THE INCOME OF RS.58 66 890/-. THE ASSESS EE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WE FIND THAT TH E CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10.08.2007 AND WAS ADJOURNED TO 06.09.2007 AND 10.1 0.2007 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER THE MATTER WAS AGAIN LISTED FOR HEARING ON 20.12.2007 AND ON 22.08.2008. ON THESE DATES NONE COULD ATTEND ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESS EE HAD NOT MADE COMPLIANCE ON THESE DATES AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT REVERTED IN ANY MANN ER THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO BY ADOPTING 12% MARGIN ON THE VALUE OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE PARENT COMPANY WAS INCORRECT. THE CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ESTIM ATION OF INCOME AT RS.58 66 890/-. 3. BEFORE US IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESS EE VIDE LETTER DATED 10.08.2007 INTIMATED THE CIT(A) THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE REGIST ERED OFFICE HAD CHANGED FORM 9 TH FLOOR TOLSTOY HOUSE 15-16 TOLSTOY MARG NEW DELH I-110 001 TO C-56 NITI BAGH ITA NO.16/DEL./2009 (A.Y. : 2004-05) 2 NEW DELHI-110 049 (INDIA). HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT CIT(A) WAS INTIMATED THE CHANGE IN ADDRESS ANOTHER NOTICE ISS UED ON 11.12.2007 FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 20.12.2007 WAS AGAIN SENT ON THE OLD ADD RESS. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN VIDE LETTER DATED 27.12.2007 INTIMATED THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE LAST NOTICE ISSUED FOR HEARING ON 21.8.2008 WAS NOT RECE IVED. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAD DISPATCHED THE ORDER ON THE OLD ADDRESS. HE HAD FILED THE PHOTOCOPY OF ENVELOPE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT CHANGE O F ADDRESS INTIMATED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MADE IN THE RECORDS OF THE CIT(A). HENCE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD.CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND DESER VES TO BE SET ASIDE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE ABOVE FACTS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE NOTICE I SSUED UP TO 20.12.2007 WERE SENT AT OLD ADDRESS ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD INTIMATED THE CHA NGE IN ADDRESS AS EARLY AS ON 10.08.2007 WHICH WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF CIT( A)-XVIII ON 17.8.2007. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN INTIMATED THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS VIDE LETTER DATED 27.12.2007 WHICH WAS FILED WITH THE CIT(A) ON 27.12.2007 ITSELF. WE HAV E ALSO GONE THROUGH THE APPELLATE FOLDER AND WE HAVE FIND THAT NOTICE FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 21.08.2008 WAS AGAIN ISSUED AT THE OLD ADDRESS. FROM THESE FACTS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LAST NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED AT THE OLD ADDRESS WHICH WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSEE ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING. THEREFORE THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED BY CIT(A) WI THOUT AFFORDING THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO CIT(A) WIT H THE DIRECTIONS TO SEND THE NOTICE AT THE CORRECT ADDRESS AND DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT A FTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT AFTER CLOSE OF TH E HEARING ON 10.02.2010. SD/- SD/- (D.R. SINGH) (K.D. RANJAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: FEB. 10 2010. *SKB* ITA NO.16/DEL./2009 (A.Y. : 2004-05) 3 COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A)-XVIII NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR ITAT LOKNAYAK BHAWAN KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT