Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 343/JP/2019
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” 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. 343/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Shri Shyam Singh Katewa The ITO, Vs. Katewa Bhawan, Ward-1, Nathaji Ka Tilla, Jhunjhunu. Jhunjhunu. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADZPK 9584 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Miss Chanchal Meena (ACIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 27/07/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28/07/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.12.2018 of ld. CIT (A), Jaipur for the assessment year 2013-14. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. The assessee has raised following grounds:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing the order ex-parte without allowing assessee an appropriate of being heard. The action of the ld. Shri Shyam Singh Katewa vs. ITO CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, against the facts of the case and against the principles of natural justice. Appropriate relief may please be granted.
2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. AO has erred in issuing notice u/s 148 without obtaining proper sanction u/s 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. AO is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in completing the assessment ex-parte u/s 144 of the IT Act, 1961 without allowing assessee an opportunity of being heard. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, against the facts of the case and the principles of natural justice. Appropriate relief may please be granted.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO of invoking the provisions of section 50C and making addition of Rs. 14,369/- . The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said addition of Rs. 14,369/-.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO of making an addition of Rs. 2,73,610/- on account of alleged unexplained cost of improvement. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said addition of Rs. 2,73,610/-.” 2 Shri Shyam Singh Katewa vs. ITO
2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing. The assessee is seeking adjournment of the hearing however, since the assessment as well as impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) were passed ex-parte due to the reason that nobody has appeared and participated in the proceedings accordingly, we propose to hear and dispose off this appeal ex-parte.
The ld. DR has submitted that the assessment order was passed ex-parte when nobody has appeared despite various opportunities issued by the AO. Though the assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) however, despite various opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A) nobody has appeared and attended the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Thus ld. DR has vehemently contended that the assessee does not deserve any further opportunity of hearing.
We have considered the contentions of ld. DR and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. We find that the AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,87,979/- in the reassessment proceedings.
The original assessment was completed U/s 143(3) of the IT Act at total income of Rs. 36,31,936/-. Therefore, the addition which was made by the AO in the reassessment proceedings is regarding re-computation of Shri Shyam Singh Katewa vs. ITO long term capital gain by restricting the cost of acquisition as well as the cost of improvement. Thus a sum of Rs. 14,369/- was added U/s 50C of the Act and an amount of Rs. 2,73,610/- was added on account of restriction of cost of improvement. It appears that this is reconsideration of the issue of long term capital gain arising from sale of plot of land which was already subject matter of the scrutiny U/s 143(3) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in para 5 and 6 as under:-
“5. It has been enumerated above that as many as 4 opportunities were given to the appellant which have not been complied with or have filed adjournment letters with frivolous reasons. I am of the view that appellant is not interested in filing supporting details for the appeal filed and pursuing it further.
Further, perusal of statement of facts in Form 35 indicates that no details, evidences or explanation are filed to rebut the findings in the order of the AO. Thus, I am of the view that grounds raised by the appellant deserve to be rejected.”
Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee by a speaking order. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case we set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the record of the ld. CIT(A) for granting one more opportunity Shri Shyam Singh Katewa vs. ITO of hearing to the assessee and then deciding the same afresh on merits. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/07/2020. Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vikram Singh Yadav) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28/07/2020. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Shyam Singh Katewa, Jumjhunu. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1, Jumjhunu. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 343/JP/2019} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत