SAVITA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, BARAN

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved for the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) without giving due and proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee has filed an affidavit in support of the contention that on every occasion when the appeal was fixed for 2 ITA 695/JP/2015 Savita Jain Vs ITO hearing she has attended the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) wherein adjournment was sought for. As per the affidavit, on the last date of hearing fixed for 04/03/2015, notice was not served on the assessee, therefore, she could not attend before the ld. CIT(A) and he has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

I have heard the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. I have considered the affidavit filed by the assessee which indicates that the ld AR of the assessee has appeared before the ld. CIT(A) on 03/04/2013, 12/03/2014 and 19/09/2014. I further observe that in a camp held at Kota, hearing of the appeal was fixed on 19/09/2014 wherein it was informed that the date of hearing in Kota camp will be intimated by notice. However, the notice of hearing fixed on 04/3/2015 was not served on the assessee and by the order dated 17/03/2015, the appeal was dismissed, therefore, in the substantial interest of justice, I set aside the ex parte of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh on merit after giving due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within two months from the date of receipt of this order. I direct accordingly.

3 ITA 695/JP/2015 Savita Jain Vs ITO 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.