M/S TALWAR JEWELLERY HOUSE,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

Since the issues involved in all the above appeals are common and the appeals were heard together so these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

At the first instance, we shall deal with the appeal in ITA No. 507/Chd/2019 for the A.Y. 2010-11 wherein Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) in Appeal No. 86/CIT(A)-3/GGN/2017-18 has erred in passing that order in contravention of the provisions of S. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO wherein he made addition of Rs.

Vide Ground No. 3 the grievance of the assessee relates to the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Facts of the case in brief are that a search operation under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) was carried out at the residential / business premises of Talwar Group of Cases including the assessee by Investigation Wing, Chandigarh on 24/07/2009. The assessment in the hands of the assessee was framed under section 153B(1)(b) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act on 23/12/2011 at an income of Rs. 7,86,53,067/- against the returned income of Rs. 5,73,10,560/-. Thereafter the case was reopened under section 148 of the Act and the A.O. made the addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- which was found credited in the books of the assessee in which no explanation was offered about nature and source.

Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who passed the impugned order ex-parte and sustained the addition made by the A.O.

Now the assessee is in appeal.

Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) framed the assessment ex-parte and there was a reasonable cause for non appearance of the authorized person of the assessee who got involved in some personal

In his rival submissions the Ld. Sr. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that ample opportunities of being heard were provided to the assessee but there was no compliance therefore the Ld. CIT(A) had no alternative except to decide the matter ex-parte.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and also perused the material available on the record. In the present case it is noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. He mentioned that many opportunities were given and the last being on 16/10/2017 , he also mentioned that the hearing was fixed on 04/10/2017 and adjournment was sought telephonically for 06/10/2017 on the said date nobody appeared and the case was adjourned to 10/10/2017, another opportunity was given for 16/10/2017, However nothing is brought on record to substantiate that the notice for hearing on 16/10/2017 was served upon the assessee. In the present case the Ld. Counsel for the assesse furnished the Affidavit of Shri Rajeev Singhi S/o Shri Kishan Lal Singhi who was the Counsel for the assessee at the relevant time before the Ld. CIT(A), the contents of the said Affidavit read as under:

From the aforesaid contents of the Affidavit furnished by the then Counsel of the Assessee, it is clear that family of the assessee was mentally, physically and financially involved in handling and pursuing the litigation of the Counsel Shri Rajiv Singhi, so there was a reasonable cause for non appearance before the Ld. CIT(A). Moreover, it is not clear as to whether the notice for hearing on 16/10/2017 was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. We therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and not to seek undue or unwarranted adjournments.

The facts in all other appeals for the A.Y’s 2011-12 to 2015-16 in ITA Nos. 508 to 512 /Chd/2019 are similar as were involved in ITA No. 507/Chd/2019 for

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.