SH.HAIDAR QURESHI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) decided the matter summarily without a finding on merits. In the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs 7,72,430/-. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) on multiple occasions, despite opportunities given.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal summarily without a proper examination of the merits due to the assessee's non-appearance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1188/JP/2019
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1188/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2010-11 cuke Shri Haider Qureshi DCIT Vs. C-55, Shahid Indra, Jyoti Nagar Circle-04, New Central Bhatta Basti, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur Revenue Build. Statute Circle, C- Scheme, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFPQ6393P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Add. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 31/08/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 03/09/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-2 Jaipur dated 18.07.2019 for Assessment Year 2010-11 confirming the addition amounting to Rs 7,72,430/- in terms of order passed by the Assessing officer u/s 147/148 of the Act.
The hearing of the matter was scheduled through video conferencing in view of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation prevailing in the country. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application was filed inspite of best efforts by the Registry. Sh. Haider Qureshi, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur 3. The ld. DR drawn our reference to the order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that on as many as six occasions, the assessee was provided reasonable opportunity by the ld. CIT(A) but the assessee has either sought adjournment or has not attended to the appellate proceedings. It was accordingly submitted that more than adequate opportunity has been provided by the ld. CIT(A) and the matter has accordingly been decided by the ld CIT(A) and the same should therefore be confirmed.
We have heard the ld DR and purused the material available on record. We find that the matter has been listed for hearing on couple of occasions by the ld CIT(A) and has been adjourned from time to time at the request of the AR and on the last date of hearing, none has attended. We believe that the assessee cannot sit back and relax merely by filing his appeal and needs to be vigilant and responsive to attend to the notices issued by the appellate authorities and non-attending to the proceedings and responding to the notices cannot be encouraged as the same burdened and clogs the judicial system. At the same time, we find that there is no finding recorded by the ld CIT(A) and the matter has been decided by the ld CIT(A) summarily without deciding on merits. We therefore believe that in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserves one more opportunity to put forth his arguments and contentions and we accordingly set aside the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to examine the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee/A/R is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and file the necessary information and documentation in support of her contentions, as so advised and ensure in timely completion of the proceedings.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Sh. Haider Qureshi, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/09/2020.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026