SHRI OM PRAKASH SAINI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-1, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 114/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 March 2019AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found a reasonable cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). Therefore, the ex parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an ex parte penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-appearance. The assessee provided reasons for this non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without adjudicating the penalty merits. Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 114/JP/2019

For Appellant: Shri Aashish Khandelwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 18/03/2019Pronounced: 20/03/2019

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 114/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 cuke Shri Om Prakash Saini, I.T.O., Vs. C/o- Ashish Khandelwal & Associates, Ward 5(1), G-2, Arihant Tower-2, Opp.- BSNL Jaipur.. Telephone Exchange, Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADUPS 1191 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Aashish Khandelwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Anuradha (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 18/03/2019 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 20/03/2019 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A)-IV, Jaipur dated 28/11/2018 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in the matter imposition of penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2. In addition to the ground raised on merit against imposition of penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee has also raised a ground 2 ITA 114/JP/2019 Om Prakash Saini Vs. ITO with regard to defective notice. However, this issue was not raised before the ld. CIT(A). Before me, the ld AR has explained the reasons for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A), I found that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-appearance, however, no justification was advanced for upholding the penalty. Considering the reasonable cause for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A) and the substantial interest of justice, I set aside the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh in terms of provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. I direct accordingly.

2.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th March, 2019

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →