M/s. Multiplex Capital Ltd., Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2281/DEL/2015 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 228120114 RSA 2015
Assessee PAN AAACM1761B
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2281/DEL/2015
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Multiplex Capital Ltd., Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC 1
Tribunal Order Date 18-10-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 23-08-2016
Next Hearing Date 23-08-2016
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 16-04-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-228 1/DEL/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-20 11-12) MULTIPLEX CAPITAL LTD. 100/28 KESHAV TOWER RAJAPUR MARKET SECTOR-9 ROHINI DELHI-110085. PAN-AAACM1761B (APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-5(4) NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY MS. ARUNA MITTAL CA RESPONDENT BY SH.N.K.BANSAL SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 23.02.2015 OF CIT(A)-6 DELHI PERTAININ G TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE PARTIES WERE HEARD ONLY IN RESPECT TO GROUND NO.2 & 3 RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 2. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT ALLOWING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE. 3. THAT THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE PASSED THE ORDE R ON MERIT OF THE CASE INSTEAD OF DISMISSING THE APPEAL SUMMARILY WIT HOUT REFERRING THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS GROUND OF APPEAL AND STATEMENTS OF FACTS. 2. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE CIT(A) AFTER NOTING THAT VARIOUS NOTICES HAD BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE IN REGARD TO WHICH NEIT HER ANY ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS PLACED NOR ANY ONE WAS PRESENT DISMISSED THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. DATE OF HEARING 23 .0 8 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18 . 1 0.2016 I.T.A .NO.-2281/DEL/2015 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. THE LD.AR HAS ARGUED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER DES ERVES TO BE SET ASIDE. THE LD.SR.DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE SAID REQUEST. 3.1. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE RECORD. I FIND THAT THE MODE OF DECISION MAKING ADOPTION BY THE LD.CIT(A) IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AS SET OUT IN SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTI ON 250 OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961. THE SAME IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER FOR READY-REFERENCE:- PROCEDURE IN APPEAL 250. (1) . (2) (3) (4) . (5) . (6) THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOS ING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETER MINATION THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. (6A)............................................... .................... 3.2. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ISSUE OF ADDITION BY WAY O F A DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A MADE BY THE AO WHICH WAS UNDER CHALLENGE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NO T EVEN ADDRESSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) WHILE PASSING THE ORDER. IN VIEW OF THIS BLATANT A ND GLARING STATUTORY DEFICIENCY THE ISSUE IS SET ASIDE AND RESTORED BACK TO THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN TERMS OF THE STATUTORY MANDATE. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH OCTOBER 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDIC IAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* I.T.A .NO.-2281/DEL/2015 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI