Twenty First Century Media Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Assessee

M/s Twenty First Century Media Pvt. Ltd., vs ACIT, G-5, IInd floor, Hauz Khas Market, Circle 16(1), New Delhi-110016 New Delhi. (PAN: AAACT 1064G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Anil Bhalla, CA Respondent by: Shri Gunjan Prasad, CIT DR

PER CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, J.M.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the

CIT(A)-XIX, New Delhi dated 16.03.2012 in Appeal No. 82/2006-07 for

Block assessment Period reckoning from 1.4.1990 to 20.7.2000.

2. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee company has a grievance on account

of the fact that the assessee has not been provided adequate opportunity to

present its submissions and case before the CIT(A) and consequently the appeal

was decided ex parte without affording opportunity of hearing for the assessee.

Ld. AR further contended that the assessee has raised ground no. 1 in this regard

which may kindly be adjudicated first.

1 IT(SS) No.09/Del/2013

3. Ld. DR replied that ground no. 1 of the assessee may be taken up for

adjudication first and department had no serious objection to that.

4. Ground no. 1 of the assessee reads as under:-

"1. The assessee company has a grievance on account of the fact that the assessee has not been provided adequate opportunity to present its submissions before the CIT(A) and consequently the appeal was decided ex parte."

5. Apropos ground no.1, we have heard arguments of both the sides and

carefully perused the relevant material placed on record, inter alia impugned

order and the assessment order. Ld. AR drawing our attention towards

operative part of the impugned order of the CIT(A) has submitted that the

assessee raised various grounds before the CIT(A) which were not decided

properly and appeal of the assessee was decided in a cryptic and slipshod

manner without affording due opportunity of hearing for the assessee. Ld. AR

further prayed that the first appellate authority has not passed a proper order,

therefore, the case may be remitted back to the file of CIT(A) for proper

adjudication as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

6. Ld. DR fairly conceded that the CIT(A) has decided the appeal in a very

brief manner without assigning any reasons for upholding the action of the AO,

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

towards remittance of the case to the file of CIT(A) for proper adjudication.

2 IT(SS) No.09/Del/2013

7. On careful consideration of above submissions of both the sides, we

observe that the CIT(A) decided the appeal of the assessee ex parte without

assigning any reasons to support the action of the AO. From Form no. 35

available on record, we note that the assessee raised nine grounds before the

CIT(A) but the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte in a single

line operative conclusion and order which reads as under:-

"The above additions were made on the basis of the seized material. After careful consideration of the facts of the case, the additions were rightly made by the AO."

8. In view of above, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has

passed a very cryptic and slipshod order ex parte without affording due

opportunity of hearing for the assessee. From the operative part of the order, we

also observe that the CIT(A) has not given any reasoning and finding while

dismissing the appeal of the assessee as the assessee raised nine grounds before

the CIT(A) and there is no specific adjudication by the CIT(A) on these grounds

of the assessee. However, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of

justice would be met if the case is restored back to the file of the file of CIT(A)

for proper adjudication of the first appeal. Thus, ground no.1 of the assessee is

allowed and impugned order is set aside by restoring the entire first appeal to

the file of CIT(A) for proper adjudication after affording due opportunity of

hearing for the assessee.

3 IT(SS) No.09/Del/2013

9. Since by the earlier part of this order, we have restored first appeal to the

file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, therefore, we are not expressing any view

on the other grounds pertaining to the merits of the case.

10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13.1.2014.

Sd/- Sd/- (J.S. REDDY) (CHANDRAMOHAN GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

DT. 13th 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