SMT. JASBIR KAUR,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), JAIPUR

The hearing of the matter was scheduled for today through video conferencing in view of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation prevailing in the country. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The ld. DR drawn our reference to the order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that on as many as nine 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 Smt. Jasbir Kaur, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Jaipur 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 her 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 the AO has brought to tax income on the sale of an immoveable property without even allowing benefit of cost of acquisition of the said property which is a legitimate deduction while computing the income under the head “capital gains”. In the assessment order, the AO has mentioned about the purchase of the property by the assessee, therefore, it is not a case where there was no cost of acquisition, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the matter relating to cost of acquisition needs to be examined. Further, the assessee in her grounds of appeal taken before the ld CIT(A) has contended that the impugned transaction has already been declared in her original return of income and where the same is found to be correct, it is a settled position that the same transaction cannot be brought to tax twice in the hands of the same assessee. We however note that there is no finding recorded by the ld CIT(A) in respect of both these matters 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 her arguments and contentions and we accordingly set aside the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to examine the matter afresh Smt. Jasbir Kaur, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Jaipur including the above two matters after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee through her 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.