Om Sai Stone Limited., Surat. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat

ITA 61/SRT/2018 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 6125614 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AAFCS2403R
Bench Surat
Appeal Number ITA 61/SRT/2018
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant Om Sai Stone Limited., Surat.
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-08-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 31-08-2021
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 01-02-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH JM & (DR.) A.L. SAINI AM ITA NO.61/SRT/2018 (A.Y: 2010-11) (VIRTUAL HEARING IN VIRTUAL COURT) OM SAI STONE LTD. 6/2060-2061-A OFF NO.107 VEDANT BUILDING BHOJABHAI NI SHERI MAHIDHARPURA SURAT. VS. THE ITO WARD-2(1)(4) AAYAKAR BHAVAN MAJURA GATE SURAT. ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AAFCS2403R ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI BIPIN JARIWALA ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : MS ANUPAMA SINGLA SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 27/08/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31/08/2021 / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2 SURAT IN APPEAL NO. CAS/2/55/2016-17 DATED 06.10.2017 WHICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) DATED 18.03.2016. 2. AT THE OUTSET ITSELF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ASSAILED THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY CONTENDING THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ORDER BEING AN EX PARTE ORDER STOOD VITIATED ON ACCOUNT OF VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO CONTEST THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.61/SRT/2018 A.Y: 2010-11 OM SAI STONE LTD. 2 LEARNED COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITS BEFORE US THAT NOTICES ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY BECAUSE THE REGISTERED OFFICE WAS CLOSED AND THE DIRECTOR HAS SHIFTED TO MAHARASHTRA THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED BEFORE US THE NEW ADDRESS FOR SENDING NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH REPRODUCED BELOW: S/O: PANDURANG KALKE FLAT NO-2/B-5 CENTRAL PARK CHS AGASHI ROAD VIRAR WEST BOLINJ VIRAR THANE MAHARASHTRA - 401303. 3. LEARNED DR FOR THE REVENUE DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION IF THE ASSESSEE`S APPEAL IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) FOR DE-NOVO ADJUDICATION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSION PUT FORTH ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON AND PERUSED THE FACT OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) AND OTHER MATERIALS BROUGHT ON RECORD. WE NOTE THAT IN THE ASSESSEES CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSMENT WAS CARRIED OUT U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS AN EX PARTE ORDER AND NON- SPEAKING ORDER THEREFORE WE DO NOT WISH TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THE MERITS OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE NOTE THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN M.S.GILL VS THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSION 1978 AIR SC 851 HELD THE DICHOTOMY BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE AND QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION VIS--VIS THE DOCTRINE OF NATURAL JUSTICE IS PRESUMABLY OBSOLESCENT AFTER KRAIPAK (A.K. KRAIPAK VS UOI AIR 1970 SC 150) WHICH MAKES THE WATER-SHED IN THE APPLICATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE TO ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS. THE RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ARE ROOTED IN ALL LEGAL SYSTEMS AND ARE NOT ANY NEW THEOLOGY. THEY ARE MANIFESTED IN THE TWIN PRINCIPLES OF NEMO JUDEX IN PARTE SUA ( NO PERSON SHALL BE A JUDGE IN HIS OWN CASE) AND AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM (THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD). IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THE AIM OF NATURAL JUSTICE IS TO SECURE JUSTICE. ITA NO.61/SRT/2018 A.Y: 2010-11 OM SAI STONE LTD. 3 6. WE NOTE THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT RECEIVE THE NOTICE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AS THE REGISTER OFFICE OF THE COMPANY WAS CLOSED AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS SHIFTED TO MAHARASHTRA THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PLEAD HIS CASE SUCCESSFULLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS WE NOTE THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND COULD NOT PLEAD HIS CASE SUCCESSFULLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). WE NOTE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT DISCUSS THE ASSESSEES CASE ON MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE HIM HENCE IT IS A VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. WE NOTE THAT IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY REQUIRE THAT THE AFFECTED PARTY IS GRANTED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO CONTEST HIS CASE. THEREFORE WITHOUT DELVING MUCH DEEPER INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER AFTER AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WHO IN TURN IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CONTEST HIS STAND FORTHWITH. THEREFORE WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH ON MERITS. FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED 31/08/2021 BY PLACING RESULT ON THE NOTICE BOARD AS PER RULE 34(5) OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULE 1963. SD/- SD/- (PAWAN SINGH) (DR. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LWJR /SURAT / DATE: 31/08/2021 SAMANTA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. PR.CIT 5. DR/AR ITAT SURAT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/SR.PS/PS ITAT SURAT