SHRI SUBHASH CHAND BAPNA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-1, JAIPUR

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for the ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A) as well as merit of the addition so upheld by him.

It was argued by the ld AR of the assessee that hearing of the case was first fixed on 21/03/2018 wherein the assessee requested for adjournment and the case was adjourned to 27/04/2018. Again on 24/5/2018, the case was adjourned at the request of the assessee.

However, on 26/6/2018, the ld. AR attended the case of the assessee which was adjourned to 07/8/2018. Finally the case was adjourned to 30/10/2018 wherein the assessee could not attend before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The ld AR of the assessee explained the reasons for non-appearing before the ld. CIT(A).

I have heard the rival contention and found that in this case, addition has been made by the Assessing Officer treating the entire amount of sale proceeds of shares and commission paid as income from undisclosed sources which was claimed as exempt by the assessee U/s 10(38) of the Act as long term capital gain being traded on National Stock Exchange and also Securities transaction Tax was paid. However, the Assessing Officer did not agree with the assessee’s contention and made the addition. Without going into the merit of the addition and considering the reasonable cause for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A) on 30/10/2018, he dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes in terms indicated hereinabove.