SMT. VIMLESH C/O- KALANI & CO., CA, 5TH FLOOR, MILESTONE BUILDING, GANDHINAGAR TURN, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, BHARATPUR, WARD-2, BHARATPUR

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved for passing ex parte order without giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee before deciding the issue. The ld AR of the assessee has drawn our

2 ITA 755/JP/2019 Smt. Vimlesh Vs ITO attention to the order of the ld. CIT(A) in which only one notice was issued for fixing the date of hearing on 25/09/2018. However, since the notice could not be served, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding the merit of the addition so made. The ld AR has also drawn our attention to the fact that it is a case of reopening by issuance of notice U/s 148 of the Act, however, this notice was not served on the assessee.

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

I have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the assessee is a housewife and her husband is working as security guard. The assessee has purchased a house property. On the information available with the department, the A.O. to verify the source of funds issued notice U/s 148 on 29/07/2017. However, there is no mention of service of this notice on the assessee, moreover, there is no observation by the A.O. as to whether any subsequent notice was served on the assessee. Furthermore, even though, the A.O. has passed order U/s 143(3) of the act but there is no appearance even before the A.O., therefore, order should have been passed U/s 144 of the Act. In the substantial interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of the A.O. for deciding