PREM LATA PANSARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, NEEMKATHANA

PER BHAGCHAND, AM

The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-35, New

Delhi (Camp Office at Jaipur ) dated 07-10-2017 for the assessment year 2010-11

raising the following grounds of appeal.

‘’1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in passing appeal order without giving proper opportunity of hearing. In fact, no notice dated 17-12-2015 and 22-09- 2016 was received by the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also ld. Lower authorities grossly erred in making and confirming disallowance of Rs. 1,65,092/- on account of interest paid.

ITA No.1136/JP/2016 Smt. Prem Lata Pansari vs ITO,Ward- Neem Ka Thana

2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the ld.AR of the assessee prayed that the ld.

CIT(A) had erred in passing appeal order without giving proper opportunity of

hearing. The ld.AR further submitted that no notices dated 17-12-2015 and 22-09-

2016 were received by the assessee. Hence, the appeal may kindly be restored to

the AO for afresh decision by providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to

the assessee.

2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A).

2.3 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on

record. It is noted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order in the absence of the AO

and the assessee. The relevant extract of ld. CIT(A)’s finding is as under:-

‘’4.1 The AO was asked to confirm the statutory validity of the appeal filed u/s 249/249(4)of the I.T. Act. He was also given an opportunity of hearing vide the said notice. However, no reply has been received by the AO. Therefore, it is presumed that the AO confirms the statutory validity of the appeal filed and does not wish to remain present in the appellate proceedings. 4.2 During the appellate proceedings, there were non-compliance by the appellant A/R. The details of non-compliance is as follows:- Issue of notice u/s 250(1) Hearing of fixed for Response of the appellant 15-09-2015 28-09-2015 Request for adjournment 17-12-2015 08-01-2016 None appeared 22-09-2016 30-09-2016 None appeared Hence, there were no additional submissions or facts brought up by the appellant to defend its appeal. The appeal is therefore, being decided on the basis of the facts and record available in file.’’

ITA No.1136/JP/2016 Smt. Prem Lata Pansari vs ITO,Ward- Neem Ka Thana

Thus it appears that the assessee is deprived of contesting the case before the ld. CIT(A) due to non-receipt of the notices and the AO had also not submitted any reply before the ld. CIT(A) as to the validity of the appeal filed u/s 249/249(4)of the I.T. Act, 1961. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be in the interest of equity and justice to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes. 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 23/10/2017.

Sd/- ¼HkkxpUn½ (Bhagchand) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 23/10/ 2017 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Smt. Prem Lata Pansari, Neem Ka Thana 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward- Neem Ka Thana vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@ CIT(A). 3. 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT, विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1136/JP/2016 ) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत