S. D. Raddi v. The Dy. CIT, Circle 2(1), Hubli
[Citation -2016-LL-1018-66]

Citation 2016-LL-1018-66
Appellant Name S. D. Raddi
Respondent Name The Dy. CIT, Circle 2(1), Hubli
Court ITAT-Bangalore
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 18/10/2016
Assessment Year 2007-08
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags opportunity of being heard
Bot Summary: Since these appeals were heard together, these are being disposed of through this consolidated order. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention that CIT(Appeals) has disposed of these appeals ITA Nos.948 to 950/Bang/2014 Page 2 of 3 summarily without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Though our attention was invited to the opening part of the CIT(Appeals) order in which he has recorded the presence of the assessee, but in the body of the order, he has mentioned at number of places that despite sufficient opportunities to the assessee, no details were filed in support of his claim. Since these appeals were not disposed of by the CIT(Appeals) after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, we are of the view that the order of CIT(Appeals) be set aside and matter be restored to his file to readjudicate the appeal afresh after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on this 18th day of October, 2016.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.948 to 950/Bang/2014 Assessment years : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Shri S.D. Raddi, Vs. Dy.CIT, Circle 2(1), Hubli. Sri Saptagiri Nivas, Sadhankeri, Addl. CIT, Range 2, Hubli. Dharwad. PAN: AECPR 6185B ITO, Ward 2(1), Hubli. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ashok A. Kulkarni, Advocate Respondent by : Shri A.R.V. Sreenivasan, Jt. CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 25.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 18.10.2016 ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member These appeals are preferred by assessee against order of CIT(Appeals). Since these appeals were heard together, these are being disposed of through this consolidated order. 2. During course of hearing, ld. Counsel for assessee has invited our attention that CIT(Appeals) has disposed of these appeals ITA Nos.948 to 950/Bang/2014 Page 2 of 3 summarily without affording proper opportunity of being heard to assessee. ld. DR did not dispute these facts. 3. Though our attention was invited to opening part of CIT(Appeals) order in which he has recorded presence of assessee, but in body of order, he has mentioned at number of places that despite sufficient opportunities to assessee, no details were filed in support of his claim. Since these appeals were not disposed of by CIT(Appeals) after affording proper opportunity of being heard to assessee, we are of view that order of CIT(Appeals) be set aside and matter be restored to his file to readjudicate appeal afresh after affording opportunity of being heard to assessee. We order accordingly. 4. In result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in open court on this 18th day of October, 2016. Sd/- Sd/- ( A.K. GARODIA ) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV ) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, 18th October, 2016. /D S/ ITA Nos.948 to 950/Bang/2014 Page 3 of 3 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondents 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. S. D. Raddi v. Dy. CIT, Circle 2(1), Hubli
Report Error