2015 (8) TMI 1544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee various grounds are raised. The ground No.16 of the assessee's appeal, which was argued first, reads as under:- 16. The Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP erred in law in grossly violating the principle of natural justice by failing to provide reasonable opportunity to the Appellant to furnish documents and evidences. 3. At the time of hearing before us, it was contended by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (in short DRP) is dated 27.11.2014; however, the DRP has fixed the hearing before it for the first time on 28.11.2014 and on the said date, it was adjourned to 05.12.2014 for filing certain details and information. That, though the details and information as asked for by the DRP was fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nly on the first page the date is mentioned as 09.12.2014; however, this page is not initialed by anybody. He, therefore, reiterated that the order of the DRP is passed without allowing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He submitted that as per sub-section 11 to section 144C, the DRP cannot issue any direction unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer. Since the DRP has issued the direction without allowing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the order passed by the DRP should be annulled. 6. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. The photocopy of the order-sheet as produced by the ld. CIT-DR before us ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e DRP after their signature; but, on the first page of the original order the date is 09.12.2014. In the order of the DRP at page No.10, paragraph No. 3.4, the DRP has discussed about the arguments put forward by the assessee in its support. However, there is no mention of the written submissions and the detailed explanation claimed to have been furnished by the assessee with DRP on 03.12.2014. The assessee has filed before us the photocopy of reply dated 03.12.2014, which is placed at page No.905 of the assessee's paper-book. From the said copy, it is evident that it was furnished with the office of the Income Tax Officer. The date of receipt is not clearly legible; however, month is December 2014. The assessee was asked to show the origin....