Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT
This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 11.11.2019 of the CIT(A)-3, Ludhiana pertaining to 2018-19 assessment year. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal :
That the order of the Ld. C1T (Appeal)-3 Ludhiana is bad in law and against facts of the case.
That the Ld. CTT (AppeaI)-3 Ludhiana is not justified in deciding the case exparte without service of the notice upon the assessee at the proper address. The address of the assessee is 25. Decent Enclave, Barwal. Near Barwal Pulli Ludhiana- 141012. whereas the notices have perhaps been served at the ITA 78/CHD/2020 A.Y. 2018-19 2 old address of the assessee i.e. at 74-13. Raj guru Nagar, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana 3. That on the facts & circumstances of the case the Worthy CIT is not instilled in deciding the case exparte without providing the proper opportunity to the appellant. I he assessee was not aware about the fixation of the case, the non appearance was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee.
4. The worthy CIT is erred in deciding the matter without going into the merits of the case and adjudicating all the ground (s) (ground no.2 & 3) of appeal submitted before her.
The appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any of ground (s) of appeal before it is finally heard.”
2. The main grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) without service of the notice and without providing proper opportunity of being heard.
The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed her return of income on 28.09.2018 declaring an income of Rs. 4,59,440/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The CPC had made an addition of Rs. 1,85,990/- and disallowed the brought forward loss of Rs. 7,19,248/-.
Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal by passing the ex-parte order.
5 Now the assessee is in appeal.
The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that no notice for hearing was served upon the assessee, therefore, the ITA 78/CHD/2020 A.Y. 2018-19 3 opportunity of being heard was not provided which is against the principles of natural justice. It was further submitted that the notices were sent at the old address inspite of the fact that the new address was in the knowledge of the Department.
In his rival submissions, the ld. Sr.DR supported the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that whenever the notice was sent to the assessee, there was no compliance, so there was no alternative except to pass the order ex-parte.
We have considered heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the present case, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) although mentioned that the notices were sent to the assessee through Registered Post, however, nothing is brought on record to substantiate that the notices were served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as
per the maxim “Audi Alteram Partem”. We, therefore, by keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
ITA 78/CHD/2020 A.Y. 2018-19 4
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 23rd November,2020.