M/S ASHOKA INDUSTRIES,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the matter has been decided ex-party qua the assessee by the ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that the notice issued for hearing by the ld. CIT(A) were sent to the factory address of the assessee whereas the assesseee while filing the appeal in Form No. 35 has given address of its authorized representative. Given that the notices were not sent to the address of the assessee so specified, notices received by some factory employee of the assessee could not be communicated to the ld. AR and hence the ld. AR could not appear before the ld. CIT(A) on the scheduled date of hearing. It was accordingly submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee may be provided an opportunity to appear before the ld.CIT(A) to submit its case. On merits, it was submitted that the matter is squarely covered in favour of the assessee wherein the disallowance of commission payment was deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench in earlier year in favour of the assessee.

Per contra, ld. DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has given more than adequate opportunity to the assessee to represent its case and given the failure on the part of the assessee and/or ld. AR, the ld CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-party qua the assessee.

Heard both the parties and persued the material available on record. It is noted that the ld. CIT(A) has issued notice for hearing on couple of occasions and on one of the occasions, the assessee/AR has attended to the appellate proceedings and matter was adjourned. However, there have been subsequent non-appearance on the next scheduled date of the hearing and non-compliance on part of the assessee/AR. Even subsequently, the ld. CIT(A) has issued notices scheduling the hearing on number of occasions. However, there have been non- appearance on the part of the assessee/AR. At the same time given that the issue is covered by the earlier decision of the Co- ordinate Bench has so contended by the ld. AR and given that the matter has not been decided on merits, we believe that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to represent it case before ld. CIT(A). Hence, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the matter to 3 M/s Ashoka Industries, Jaipur vs. The DCIT, Jaipur the file of ld. CIT(A) subject to cost of Rs. 2000/-. Needless to say, the assessee/AR shall appear before the ld. CIT(A) and provide the necessary information/documentation and cooperate in timely completion of the appellate proceedings.