G.KRISHNA RAO SUBUDHI,RAYAGADA vs. ITO, RAYAGADA WARD, RAYAGADA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.493/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2001-2002

G.Krishna Rao Subudhi, Vs. ITO, Rayagada Ward,. Prop. M/s. jagannath Rayagada. Enterprises, At: Gunupur, Rayagada. PAN/GIR No.ACQPG 9772 K (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri J.M. Patnaik, AR Revenue by : Shri A.K.Dutta, DR

Date of Hearing : 22/02/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22 /02/ 2019

O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of

the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Bhubaneswar dated

31.8.2017 for the assessment year 2001-02.

that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte

without assigning any reason.

assessee submitted that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed

by the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to put in appearance on the

P a g e 1 | 4

ITA No 493/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 01- 200 2

dates fixed for hearing. He submitted that the assessee was bed

ridden due to facture of his right leg for a long period and staying

at Berhampur with his daughter. After being physically fit to

resume his day to day activities, he stayed in his own house at

Gunupur after September, 2017. The business activities of the

assessee was stopped for a pretty long period. The notices sent

by the CIT(A) were not served as he was not available in the

address given in appeal memo. Ld A.R. also submitted medical

certificate in respect of his non-appearance. He prayed that in the

interest of justice, one more opportunity should be granted to the

assessee to present its case before the CIT(A). He submitted that

he personally undertakes to appear before the CIT(A) and produce

all details and documents as and when called upon to do so.

assessee is not cooperating in disposing the appeal, then the

CIT(A) has no option but to decide the appeal exparte and,

therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is quite correct and

justified. However, in all fairness, ld D.R. submitted that if it is

found just and proper to provide an opportunity of being heard to

the assessee, then the department has no serious objection if the

case is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

P a g e 2 | 4

ITA No 493/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 01- 200 2

am of the considered view that the assessee is an old person and

sustained fracture to his right leg for a long period and was

staying at Berhampur with his daughter for treatment and care.

Looking into the facts of serious illness, I am of the considered

view that ends of justice would meet if the assessee is allowed an

opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A) to explain his grounds filed

before him in Form No.35. Therefore, this appeal is restored to

the file of the CIT(A) with a direction that he shall decide the

appeal afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of bearing to

the assessee. If the assessee fails to co-operate with the CIT(A)

in disposing the appeal, he will face the consequence and should

not be allowed any further relief on this count that he was not

allowed opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A). Therefore, I set

aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the appeal to his file for

fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of

hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to appear on

4.4.2019 and file all the details and documents before the CIT(A).

fresh adjudication, other grounds of appeal have become

infructuous and not adjudicated upon.

P a g e 3 | 4

ITA No 493/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 01- 200 2

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 22/02/2019. Sd/- (Chandra Mohan Garg) JUDICIALMEMBER Cuttack; Dated 22/02/209 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : G.Krishna Rao Subudhi, Prop. M/s. jagannath Enterprises, At: Gunupur, Rayagada.

Sr. Pvt. Secretary, ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 4 | 4