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. 494/JP/2019
ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19/03/2019 of ld. CIT(A), Alwar for the A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
2. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not deciding the individual grounds of appeal on merits and thereby upholding the order of AO.
3. The assessee craves to amend, alter and modify any of the grounds of appeal.
4. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee.”
2 ITA 494/JP/2019_ Sh. Ashok Kr. Saini Vs ITO 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed impugned order ex parte without affording a reasonable and appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Even the appeal was dismissed summarily without adjudication of the matter on merits. The ld AR has further submitted that on all the occasions of the date of hearing, he has filed adjournment, however, the ld. CIT(A) without giving the reasons for rejecting the adjournments, has passed the impugned ex parte order. Therefore, it is a violation of principles of natural justice. When there was an adjournment application on behalf of the assessee, which was neither specifically disallowed nor any reason is given for rejecting the request for adjournment. Hence, the ld AR has submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and the assessee may be given one more opportunity of hearing before the ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, the ld DR has objected to the setting aside of the matter and giving more opportunity to the assessee. She has contended that the assessee has not produced any evidence in support of the claim despite eight opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A), therefore, no further opportunity should be given to the assessee. She has relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).
3 ITA 494/JP/2019_ Sh. Ashok Kr. Saini Vs ITO 4. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record we note that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing the impugned ex parte order in para 3.1 to 3.3 as under:
“3.1 In this case, notices u/s 250 was issued to the appellant by fixing the hearing on 26-04-2018, 17-07-2018, 08-08-2018, 30-08-2018, 19-09- 2018, 04-10-2018, 10-10-2018 and 15-11-2018 by this office. AR sought adjournments at number of occasions and liberal time was given. Still no submission was made in support of the claims. Opportunity of being heard is central to any adjudication process but that does not absolve the appellant from non attendance and submission of evidences in support of ground of appeal despite repeated and several notices sent and served and not responded. An adjudication proceeding cannot be held in abeyance indefinitely on account of non attendance of the appellant or his AR. In this case the continued non responsive attitude of the appellant has left no option before me but to decide the appeal on the basis of evidences on record.
3.2 I have taken into consideration the facts of the case filed along with Form No. 35.
3.3 In absence of any submissions by the appellant in support of its claims, I have relied upon the facts mentioned in the assessment order. Accordingly, I do not see any reason to interfere in the assessment order. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.”
Though, the ld. CIT(A) has mentioned various dates of hearing on which the appeal of the assessee was fixed. However, there is no reason given 4 ITA 494/JP/2019_ Sh. Ashok Kr. Saini Vs ITO by the ld. CIT(A) for rejecting the adjournments sought on behalf of the ld AR of the assessee. Even while passing the ex parte order, the ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits but summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-appearance. The impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is not inconformity with the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which requires the CIT(A) has to pass order in writing giving reasons for his conclusion. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the impugned order to the record of the ld. CIT(A) for granting one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and then decide the appeal on merits of the issue. We may clarify that in case, the assessee fails to appear and argue before the ld. CIT(A), the opportunity granted by us shall stand vacated.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open court on 02nd June, 2020.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼foØe flag ;kno½ ¼fot; iky jko½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 02/06/2020 *Ranjan 5 ITA 494/JP/2019_ Sh. Ashok Kr. Saini Vs ITO आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Ashok Kr. Saini, Alwar. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward 2(1), Alwar. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 494/JP/2019) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत