SHRI ASHISH GULWANI,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved for passing ex parte order by the ld. CIT(A) without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee wherein the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed interest on late deposit and late filing fee.

2 ITA 729/JP/2018 Ashish Guwalani Vs DCIT 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the interest levied and the late filing fees was contrary to the provisions of law. Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee was living in Mumbai (Maharastra) whereas tax consultant was residing at Kota (Rajasthan) accordingly notice issued by the ld. CIT(A) fixing the date of hearing could not be served on the assessee. Proper opportunity of hearing was not given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee before dismissing the assessee’s appeal.

On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

I have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found from the record that the assessee was residing outside Jaipur whereas tax consultant of the assessee was residing at Kota. Notice issue by the ld. CIT(A) fixing the date of hearing could not be served on the assessee. Considering the affidavit filed by the assessee and in the substantial interest of justice, I set aside the ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to him for deciding the issue afresh by giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. I direct accordingly.