SHRI HARESHBHAI L. RUKADIA,SURAT vs. THE INOCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(3), SURAT

Assessee by Ms. Chetali Shah, AR Revenue by Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr-DR Date of hearing 08/07/2021 Date of pronouncement 08/07/2021 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1. 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-3, Surat dated 12.07.2018, which in turn arises from the assessment order dated 23.12.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year (AY) 2014-15.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessment for the year under consideration was completed on 23.12.2016 under section 143(3) r.w.s.

3. We have heard the submissions of learned authorised representative (AR) for the assessee and the learned senior departmental representative (Sr DR) for the revenue. The ld AR for the assessee submits that during the relevant period when the hearing was taken up before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee was having serious health issues. The assessee was facing depression and on one occasion tried to commit suicide. Due to serious health problems, the assessee could not attend the hearing nor intimated to his authorized representative to attend the hearing before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. for the assessee submits that the assessee has good case on merit and will certainly succeed, provided the assessee is given opportunity of hearing on merit. The ld AR for the assessee prayed to restore the appeal to the files of learned CIT(A), with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and she undertake on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in future. In alternative submission the ld. AR for the assessee submits that the order passed by ld CIT(A) is not on merit of the case and non-speaking order. The order passed by ld CIT(A) is liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

Hareshbhai L Rukadia 4. On the other hand the ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that the assessee was given ample opportunity as recorded in para 3 of the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee failed to comply with the notice issued by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has never informed about his ill health. The ld. CIT(A) left with no option, except to proceed to decide the issue and in absence of any evidence or explanation affirm the action of AO. The learned Sr DR for the revenue prayed for dismissal of the appeal. On the alternative submission In alternative submission, the ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that in case the Hon’ble bench deems it appropriate to restore the grounds of appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A), the assessee be directed to be vigilant and not to default in future in attending the proceedings and to waste the time of public authorities/ld. CIT(A). The assessee should not take the proceeding before the first appellate authority in casual manner.

5. We have considered the rival submission of ld. AR for the assessee and the DR for the revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities. We find that the ld. CIT(A) fixed the hearing on three occasions as mentioned in para 3 of the impugned order. Before us the learned AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee was facing depression and was unable to attend the hearing and even could not inform his representative.