M/S. SINGHANIA LUNIVERSITY,JHUNJHUNU DISTRICT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 19.12.2018 for the assessment year 2014-15 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds. ‘’1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) is wrong,unjust and has erred in M/s. Singhania University vs ACIT, Exemption, Jaipur

(b) That the addition of Rs. 9,53,67,236/- to the income of the appellant on account of disallowance of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961 allegedly on the ground exemption under section is withdrawn from A.Y. 2013-14 and onwards is wrong and bad in law inasmuch as appeal against said withdrawal order is pending before the ITAT.’’ 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, we noticed that the ex-parte order was passed by the ld. CIT(A) holding that in spite of issuance of notices upon the assessee, the assessee did not appear before him on the dates of hearing. The ld. CIT(A) while passing the ex-parte order in the case of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271. M/s. Singhania University vs ACIT, Exemption, Jaipur 2.2 The ld.AR of the assessee submitted that at no point of time the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) were served upon him or his aurhtorised representative. The ld.AR of the assessee in support of his contentions has filed the affidavit of Shri Bhupendra Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh, Joint Registrar of Singhania University. The ld.AR of the assessee has also filed the affidavit of one Shri Manish Agarwal, CA of M/s. Brij Kishore & Company, Jhunjhunu who has deposed therein that no such notice of hearing of appeal was served upon him or other authorized officer. From the contents of the affidavits, we noticed that the categorical stand has been taken by the assessee that assessee was not served upon the notices by the ld. CIT(A), and the assessee was not aware of the passing of the order by ld. CIT(A)’s till 5th March,2019.

2.3 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A).

2.4 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. From the ld. CIT(A)’s order, we noticed that he has not mentioned anywhere in his order that the notices issued by him were served upon the assessee or his authorized representative. What has been mentioned is that the notices were issued upon the assessee M/s. Singhania University vs ACIT, Exemption, Jaipur which does not indicate that the assessee had received the information about the dates of hearing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A).It appears that the assessee was deprived of receiving the information as to the dates of hearing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)

2.4.1 Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that the interest of justice would be met in case the present appeal is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merits after hearing. Therefore, keeping in view our above observations, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same afresh after providing one more opportunity to the assessee.

Simultaneously, we direct the assessee to appear before ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee would be at liberty to raise all the grounds raised before us or any other grounds if so advice, before ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate upon all the grounds raised by the assessee by passing a speaking order. With these directions, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes. M/s. Singhania University vs ACIT, Exemption, Jaipur 3.0 In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes with no order as to cost. Order pronounced in the open court on 30/09/2019.