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. 141/JP/2020
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. 141/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2016-17 cuke Shri Nawal Kumar Agarwal ITO, Vs. 112, Kalyan Nagar, Sita Badi Ward-6(4), Tonk Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKCPA8618A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Anoop Bhatia (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 03/06/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 03/06/2020 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 09.01.2020.
At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that no adequate and reasonable opportunity has been provided by the ld. CIT(A) and the appeal has been decided ex-parte qua the assessee without adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit. It was submitted that firstly, it was not a case of non compliance by the assessee in as much as on all the occasions, the assessee has attended the proceeding through his AR and ld. CIT(A) has also granted adjournment. Regarding non-appearance on the last date of hearing scheduled for hearing on 08.01.2020, it was submitted that the ld. AR sought an adjournment on the said date, however, adjournment was denied and the matter was decided Shri Nawal Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Jaipur ex-parte very next day by the ld CIT(A). It was further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has also not decided the matter on merits as required u/s 250(6) of the Act. It was accordingly submitted that in the interest of substantial justice, the appeal may kindly be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merits.
3. Per contra, the ld. DR drawn our reference to the order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that on as many as five occasions, the assessee was provided reasonable opportunity by the ld. CIT(A) but the assessee through its AR has either sought adjournment or has not been bothered to appear before the ld. CIT(A). It was accordingly submitted that more than adequate opportunity has been provided by the ld. CIT(A) and no purposes would be served in providing further opportunity to the assessee. Further, she relied on the order of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions and pursued 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 at the request of the ld AR on behalf of the assessee and again on the last date of hearing when the matter was scheduled for hearing, the assessee has sought an adjournment and thereafter, on the next day, the matter was decided ex- parte by the ld CIT(A) summarily without deciding on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play and especially where the matter has not been decided on merits, we believe that 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 is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and file the necessary information Shri Nawal Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Jaipur and documentation in support of his contentions, as so advised and ensure in timely completion of the proceedings.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/06/2020.