SMT. SUSHILA MAHESHWARI,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, TONK

ORDER

PER RAMESH C. SHARMA, AM

Since, the assessee had changed his counsel, therefore, the notice so issued by the ld. CIT(A) was neither served upon the assessee nor the assessee was informed by the earlier counsel regarding the notice issued by the ld. CIT(A) for attending the hearing. The ld.AR of the assessee also filed the affidavit to this effect before the Bench. The Bench has gone through the affidavit so filed by the assessee wherein the Bench found that assessee had earlier appointed counsel Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta Associate, whose name and address is also mentioned in Form No. 35 for service of notice by the Department. Since the assessee has changed his counsel, therefore, the notice sent by the ld. CIT(A) might have been served at the address mentioned in Form No. 35 which could not be reached to the assessee due to change of counsel. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the substantial interest of justice, I restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for afresh hearing after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within a period compliance, the ld. CIT(A) will be at liberty to pass the order after considering the merits of the case. I direct accordingly.

3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 02 /08/2019.