HAIMAD MAHAMMAD,KARIMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, KARIMNAGAR

At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before me that the Ld. AO has passed ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to the assessee of being heard and the same was confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A). It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. AO in order to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to pursue the appeal effectively. Ld. DR, on the other hand, vehemently opposed to the submissions of the Ld. AR and argued that sufficient opportunities had been provided to the assessee however, on the given dates of hearing, neither the assessee nor his Representative responded to the notices issued by the Ld. AO. It was further submitted that even before the Ld. CIT (A), though the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared before the Ld. CIT (A), he had not provided any evidence in support of the assessee’s case. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) had no other option but to decide the appeal based on the materials available on record. Hence, it was pleaded that the order passed by the Ld. Revenue Authorities does

I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. On examining the facts of the case, I find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR. The Ld. AO had given sufficient opportunities to the assessee. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. AO. Even before the Ld. CIT (A), there was no effective representation by the Ld. AR to support the assessee’s case. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal based on the material on record. In this situation, I do not find much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. However, before me the Ld. AR has filed paper book for the first time consisting of 11 pages containing return of income along with computation of total income for the AY 2014-15, LIC premium paid certificate and the assessee’s five bank account statements with Telangana Grameena Bank as additional evidence. Since, the Ld. AR has argued before me by stating that the additional evidence filed before the Tribunal goes to the root of the matter and if an opportunity is given before the Ld. AO, the assessee can substantiate his case with the support of these additional evidence, I am of the view that the assessee should be given one more opportunity before the Ld. AO. Therefore, considering the prayer of the Ld. AR, the profession of the assessee being Registered Medical Practitioner (RMP) and considering his meagre

Before parting, it is worthwhile to mention that this order is pronounced after 90 days of hearing the appeal, which is though against the usual norms, I find it appropriate, taking into consideration of the extra-ordinary situation in the light of the lock-down due to Covid-19 pandemic. While doing so, I have relied in the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. JSW Ltd. In ITA No.6264/M/2018 and 6103/M/2018 for AY 2013-14 order dated 14th May 2020. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.