What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that there was no record to substantiate the service of notice on the assessee for the hearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, to uphold the principles of natural justice, the case was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee filed a return of income, but the assessment was framed with an addition of Rs. 4 lacs. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, violating the principles of natural justice.

Murari Lal Sharma, Sikar vs ITO | ITAT Jodhpur 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI N.K. SAINIShri Murari Lal,

For Respondent: DR None

Hearing: 06.05.2019Pronounced: 06.05.2019

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 29.10.2018 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Jaipur

The grievance of the assessee vide Ground Nos. 1 to 4 relates to the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) wihtout providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The said grounds read as under:- 1. That, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - III, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as Appellate Authority ) has grossly erred on the facts and on the law in rejecting the appeal ex-parte without jurisdiction of law and passed the impugned order without considering the facts of the case in a proper manner as the aasessee-appellant is living in Sikar (Rajasthan ) and posted at Ladnu in Nagaur Distt. ( Rajasthan), and there is no any relevancy of Churu ( Rajasthan ), Hence, the impugned appellate and assessment both orders are against the facts of the case, provisions of the Act, and against the principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned appellate and assessment both orders are liable to be quashed, therefore, the same may kindly be quashed'

That, the Learned Appellate Authority has grossly erred on the facts and on the law in rejecting the appeal ex-parte and passed the impugned order without considering the facts of the case in a proper manner Hence, the impugned appellate order is against the facts of the case and principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned appellate and assessment both orders are liable to be quashed, therefore, the same may kindly be quashed.

That, the learned appellate authority has grossly erred on the facts and on the law on account of non filing of appeal electronically as per requirement of rule 12 of the Income tax Rules, 1962. However, the requirement to file appeal under rule 12 is for the returns relevant for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Hence, the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of rule 12. Therefore, the impugned appellate and assessment order both are liable to be quashed, the same may kindly quashed.

That, the learned appellate authority has grossly erred on the facts and on the law in sustaining the it impugned assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-lst,

Churu ( Assessing authority ) without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and making addition of Rs. 4,00,000/- in the returned income of Rs. 3,00,616/-, hence, the impugned appellate and assessment both orders are illegal, unjustified, arbitrary, and against the principles of natural justice, hence, liable to be quashed, and addition of Rs. 4,00,000/- and the tax thereon and the tax including E. cess imposed of Rs.1,18,642/-, and interest thereon Rs. 1,13,393/- may kindly be deleted.

Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of

income on 5.6.2009 declaring an income of Rs. 3,00,616/-. However, the

assessment was framed at an income of Rs. 7,06,016/- by making the

addition of Rs. 4 lacs considering the same as on-money of the assessee

paid to the seller for purchase of plot.

Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A)

who dismissed the appeal ex-parte by observing that the notice was

issued for hearing on 13.7.2018, on the said date, staff of the authorized

representative attended and the case was adjourned to 26.10.2018 but on

the said date, nobody was parent and the case was adjourned to

13.9.2018 but nobody appeared on the said date.

Now the assessee is in appeal.

Nobody was present on behalf of the assessee . I have considered

the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR. In the present case, it is noticed that

the Ld. CIT(A) although mentioned that the notice was issued for hearing on 13.9.2018, however, nothing is on record to substantiate that the said notice was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. I, therefore, by 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.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 06.05.2019)

Sd/- (N.K. SAINI) Vice President Dated : 06.05.2019 “आर.के.”

आदेशक��त�ल�पअ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकरआयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील!यआ�धकरण, च$डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, Jodhpur 6. गाड'फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

MURARI LAL SHARMA,SIKAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, CHURU

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments