SMT. PUSHPA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

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. 491/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Smt. Pushpa Devi The ITO, Vs. W/o Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa, Ward-7(2), Village- Vatika, Teshil- Sanganer, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AMYPD 1867 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/11/2021 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 18/11/2021 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.12.2018 of ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur for the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised following grounds.:-

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not deciding the appeal on the merits and passing an ex-parte order. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, Smt. Pushpa Devi vs. ITO unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Appropriate relief may please be ground.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 52,25,000/- made by ld. AO toward unexplained investment u/s 69 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 deleting the said addition of Rs. 52,25,000/”.

“The present appeal is against the assessment order passed u/s 147/144 of the Act. I have carefully perused the grounds of appeal and assessment order. The appellant has failed to offer any explanation for submission in support of the grounds raised in this appeal nor any supporting evidences were produced by him despite adequate opportunity having been provided. In this connection, reliance may be pleased upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulai (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that he appellate authorities cannot substitute its own judgment in place of the judgment of the A.O. unless it is shown that the judgment of the A.O. was biased, irrational vindictive or capricious. In the instant case the appellant has not able to show that the decision of the A.O. was arbitrary, biased, irrational vindictive or capricious without any basis, I find no reason to interfere with the decision of the A.O.”

4. Thus it is clear that the ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits but the same was dismissed for want of any explanation/prosecution on behalf of the assessee by none speaking order. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the record of the Smt. Pushpa Devi vs. ITO ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the same on merits by speaking order after giving one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18/11/2021. 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:- 18/11/2021. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Smt. Pushpa Devi, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur. 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. 491/JP/2019} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत