SHRI SHASHI GOLECHA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-1, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 174/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 June 2019AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and set aside the ex parte orders of the CIT(A). The matters were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals against penalty orders were dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that he was undergoing cancer treatment and could not attend hearings, with notices being served late.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order of the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution was justified, considering the assessee's medical condition and inability to attend hearings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 175/JP/2019

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 25/04/2019Pronounced: 21/06/2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 175/JP/2019
ITA No. 174/JP/2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. Firstly we take This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A), Ajmer dated 19/11/2018 for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the matter

1.

2 ITA 175 & 174/JP/2019_ Mahesh Chand Golecha Vs ITO & one anr. of imposition of penalty U/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

There is delay in filing the appeal. In support of the delay, the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay. After going through the application for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that there was reasonable ground for delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and appeal is being heard on merit.

3.

We have considered the rival contention and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. The A.O. has levied penalty U/s 271B of the Act for not getting the books of account audited. However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for non- prosecution.

3. It was the contention of the ld AR of the assessee that the assessee Shri Mahesh Chand Golecha was suffering from cancer and from August, 2018 to December, 2018, he was undergoing regular treatment at Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital & Research Centre, Jaipur. He further contended that the notices for hearing was issued by the ld. CIT(A). However, two notices were served on the wife of the assessee after the date of hearing fixed in it. As the assessee was hospitalized he could not produce evidence in support of his claim.

3 ITA 175 & 174/JP/2019_ Mahesh Chand Golecha Vs ITO & one anr. However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal without going into merit of the penalty so levied. He dismissed the assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution.

4.

From the record we found that the assessee has placed on record sufficient evidence to show that he was suffering from cancer and during the relevant period when the case was fixed for hearing and the notices were issued, he was hospitalized and could not attend the hearing. In the substantial interest of justice, we set aside ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A) and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh after giving due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

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

6.

Now we take This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A), Ajmer dated 19/11/2018 for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the matter of imposition of penalty U/s 271B of the Act.

7.

In this appeal also, there is delay in filing the appeal. In support of the delay, the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay. After going through the application for condonation of delay, we are 4 ITA 175 & 174/JP/2019_ Mahesh Chand Golecha Vs ITO & one anr. satisfied that there was reasonable ground for delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and appeal is being heard on merit.

8.

In this appeal also, by passing ex parte order, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, who is wife of Shri Mahesh Chand Golecha, which we have already discussed hereinabove. As the assessee was also engaged in the hospital due to serious health problem of her husband due to which she could not attend before the ld. CIT(A). In the substantial interest of justice, we set aside ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A) and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh after giving due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

9.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed in part for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open court on 21st June, 2019.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →