SHRI VIKAS JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1048/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 November 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had a reasonable cause for not appearing before the CIT(A) and that proper opportunity was not given. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee claimed exemption under Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains, which was denied by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the merits and providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(38),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1048/JP/2018

For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 19/11/2019Pronounced: 20/11/2019

ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 28/08/2018 for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the matter of order passed U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved for the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee filed an affidavit to explain that proper opportunity was not given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee.

1.

2 ITA 1048/JP/2018 Vikas Jain Vs DCIT 3. I have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the assessee’s claim of exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act in respect of long term capital gain was declined by the A.O. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal without going on merit after observing that the assessee has failed to offer any explanation for submission in support of the grounds raised in this appeal.

4.

The ld AR Shri Rajnikant Bhatra invited our attention to the copy of purchase bill of share purchased from M/s Kappac Pharma Ltd., copy of account statement of assessee in the books of broker M/s Natraj Capital & Credit Pvt. Ltd., copy of share transfer form and share certificates, copy of bank statement highlighting the amount paid for purchase of shares, copy of sale bill (contract note of sale of shares of M/s Kappac Pharma Ltd.), copy of account statement of assessee in the books of broker M/s Master Capital services Ltd., copy of bank statement highlighting the consideration received on sale of shares and copy of D-mat account/share holding statement. In view of all these documentary evidences, it was argued by the ld AR that the assessee’s claim for long term capital gain were wrongly denied by the A.O.

3 ITA 1048/JP/2018 Vikas Jain Vs DCIT 5. After going through the affidavit, I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the substantial interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh on merit after considering the assessee’s contention. Needless to say, the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of hearing.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th November, 2019 Sd/- ¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (RAMESH C SHARMA) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 20th November, 2019 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Vikas Jain, Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The D.C.I.T., Circle-7, Jaipur. 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. 1048/JP/2018) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 10(38)

All 3,113 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(38) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →