Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Nagpur
Hscl-Sipl(Jv), Nagpur vs Assessee on 22 January, 2014
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, नागपरू यायपीठ, (ई-कोट), मंब
ु ई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, "NAGPUR" BENCH,
(E-COURT), MUMBAI
सव ी एच.एल. कारवा, अ य , एवं ी राजे ,लेखा सद य
Before Shri H L Karwa, President, & Shri Rajendra, AM
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.319/Nag/2013
( नधारण वष / Assessment Year :2007-08)
M/s. HSCL-SIPL, Vs. The Dy. CIT Cir.8,
25, Shricon House, Nagpur
Pragati Layout, Rajeevnagar
Somalwada, Nagpur- 25
PAN : AAAAH2059M
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ / Respondent)
Appellant by : Mr. M Mani
Respondent by : Ms. Priti Jain Das
Date of Hearing : 22.01.2014 Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2014
आदे श / O R D E R
Per H L Karwa, President :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-II,
Nagpur, dated 01.03.2013, confirming the penalty of Rs.1,12,58,252/- imposed u/s.
217(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 (in short the Act) for A.Y. 2007-08.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of
income on 30.10.2007 declaring income at Rs. Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny
and order u/s. 144 of the Act was passed on 09.12.2009 determining total income at
2
ITA No.319/Nag/2013
AY:2007-08
Rs.Nil and no losses were allowed to be carried forward. According to the Assessing
Officer the assessee had claimed business loss of Rs.3,41,89,203/-. There was no
supporting evidence and, therefore, the business loss claimed by the assessee was
disallowed and the income was treated as 'Nil' with the direction that no brought
forward losses could be carried forward. The Assessing Officer vide order dated
20.06.2010 imposed a penalty of Rs.1,12,68,252/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for
concealing particulars of income.
3. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer and, hence
the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material
available on record. It is observed that the CIT(A) has passed impugned order without
affording an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In other words, the
CIT(A) has decided the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. It is well settled law that a
right of appeal wherever conferred includes a right of being afforded an opportunity of
being heard, irrespective of the language conferring such right. That is a part and
parcel of the principle of natural justice. Where an authority is required to act in a
quasi-judicial capacity, it is imperative to give the appellant an adequate opportunity of
being heard before deciding the appeal. Shri M Mani, the learned counsel for the
assessee, submitted that the quantum appeal filed against the assessment order is
pending before the CIT(A) for adjudication. He therefore submitted that the matter
may be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh after deciding the
quantum appeal of the assessee.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the
opinion that before deciding the appeal of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) has not
afforded adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and, therefore, we set
aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) with a
direction to decide the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law after affording
due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
3
ITA No.319/Nag/2013
AY:2007-08
6. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the E-Court on this 22nd day of January, 2014.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajendra) (H L Karwa)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PRESIDENT
MUMBAI, Dt : 22nd January, 2014
SA
Copy forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The C.I.T, concerned
4. The CIT (A)-concerned
5. The DR, Nagpur Bench
BY ORDER
//True Copy// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai