What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found sufficient reasons for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). Therefore, the matters were restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh decision on merits after providing due opportunity of hearing.

The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders for delayed filing of E-TDS returns. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals ex-parte without giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Suraj Mining (Granite) Pvt. Ltd. vs JCIT | ITAT Jaipur 2019

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

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 77/JP/2017

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CA, Smt. Sibangi Samdhani, ld.ARs jktLo dh vksj ls@

Hearing: 15/04/2019Pronounced: 23/04/2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 77/JP/2017

ITA No. 78/JP/2017

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

vkns'k@ ORDER

These are the appeals filed by the respective assessee against the separate orders of ld.CIT(A)-35, Jaipur dated 05/10/2016 and 03/10/2016 for the A.Y. 2011-12 in the matter of imposition of penalty (of Rs.1,14,800/- & Rs.78,968/-) u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) without giving the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. From the record I found that the AO had levied penalty(ies) for delay in filing E- TDS return by invoking provisions of section 272A(2) of the I.T Act, 1961.

By the impugned orders of the ld. CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of assessee by observing that there was no compliance of the assessee. The ld. AR before me placed on record an affidavit explaining the reasons for non-appearance of assessee before the ld. CIT(A). After going through the said affidavit and reasons for non-appearance, I am satisfied that there are sufficient reasons in non-appearance before the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, in the substantial intertest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter/appeals afresh on merits/material available on record, after giving due opportunity of hearing to assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within 60 days from the receipt of this tribunal order. We direct accordingly. statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on …23rd …April, 2019.

¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (RAMESH C SHARMA) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 23rd April, 2019 *PP/SPS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- M/s. Suraj Mining (Granite) Pvt. Ltd, 205 1. Upasana Apartment, Bihari Maarg, Bani Park, Jaipur/ M/s. Suraj Export, 205 Upasana Apartment, Bihari Maarg, Bani Park, Jaipur. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent-The J.C.I.T.(TDS), Jaipur/ 2. ITO,TDS-1,Jaipur. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA Nos.77 & 78/JP/2017) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

SURAJ MINING (GRANITE) PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT (TDS), JAIPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments