Mohan Sambhaji Jagthap, Gurgaon vs Assessee

PER CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, J.M.

These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the

separate orders of the CIT(A)-I, New Delhi all dated 7.1.2013 in Appeal No.

47/11-12, 45/11-12, 44/11-12 and 43/11-12 for AY 2002-03, 2005-06,

2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted

that ground no.2 of the assessee in all four appeals may kindly be taken up

first. Ld. DR agreed to that. Ground no. 2 of the assessee in all four appeals

reads as under:-

"2. That the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is against the principles of natural justice."

1 ITA 1827 to 1830/Del/2013 Asstt.Years: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06

2. Apropos ground no.2, we have heard arguments of both the sides and

carefully perused the relevant material placed on record. Ld. Counsel of the

assessee has drawn our attention towards para 2 of the assessment order

and submitted that the AO issued several notices fixing the date of hearing

after a few days but the AO has not drawn any conclusion when despite due

service of notice, neither the assessee nor his representative remained

absent during the assessment proceedings. Ld. Counsel of the assessee has

further drawn our attention towards impugned order of the CIT(A) para 9

and submitted that the assessee raised ground no. 9 before the first

appellate authority alleging that the order passed by the AO was against the

principles of natural justice but the CIT(A) did not pay any heed to ground

no. 9 of the assessee and the CIT(A) dismissed ground no. 9 without any

specific adjudication by holding that the same is general/consequential in

nature and does not require any specific adjudication.

3. Ld. DR contended that if assessee is not cooperating during the

assessment proceedings, then the AO has no alternative but to complete

proceedings ex parte, in time barred cases. However, ld. DR fairly accepted

that if it is found just and proper, the department has no serious objection if

all the appeals are remitted back to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication.

2 ITA 1827 to 1830/Del/2013 Asstt.Years: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06

4. In view of above submissions of both the sides and observation of the

AO in para 2 of the assessment order as noted and submitted before us

hereinabove and approach of the CIT(A) about ground no. 9 of the assessee,

we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was not provided due

opportunity of hearing before the authorities below and we have no

hesitation to hold that this is a clear violation of principles of natural justice

on the part of revenue authorities. Thus, we are of the considered opinion

that the assessment proceedings in all four appeals deserve to be restored

back to the file of AO for a fresh de novo adjudication. Therefore, impugned

orders as well as assessment orders in all these four cases are set aside and

these cases are restored to the file of AO for a fresh de novo adjudication

after affording due opportunity of hearing for the assessee. The assessee is

also directed to cooperate with the AO during assessment proceedings.

Accordingly, ground no. 2 of the assessee in all four appeals is allowed.

5. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have restored all four cases

to the file of AO for a fresh de novo reassessment, therefore, other grounds

of the assessee do not survive for adjudication by this Tribunal. Finally, all

four appeals of the assessee are deemed to be allowed for statistical

purposes.

3 ITA 1827 to 1830/Del/2013 Asstt.Years: 2007-08, 02-03, 06-07, 05-06

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.01.2015.

Sd/- Sd/-

(G.D. AGRAWAL) (CHANDRAMOHAN GARG) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER

DT. 27th January, 2015 'GS'

Copy forwarded to:-

1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. C.I.T.(A) 4. C.I.T. 5. DR By Order

Asstt. Registrar

4