SHRI. MAYANAMADA MONNAPPAA GANESH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(3)(3), BANGALORE

The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee confirming the various additions made by the AO.

The ld AR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has posted the appeal for hearing on various dates and the assessee sought adjournments either by appearing in person or by filing letters. Finally the case was posted for hearing on 4/4/2019 and the ld CIT(A) passed the order on the very same day by observing that non appeared before him on that day. The ld AR submitted that the assessee has been pursuing the matter before ld CIT(A) and hence the first appellate authority was not justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without hearing the assessee.

On the contrary the ld DR submitted that the assessee did not appear before ld CIT(A) on 4/4/2019 and hence the ld CIT(A) was constrained to pass order ex-parte.

We heard the rival contentions and perused the record. Though the assessee has stated that he has appeared/filed adjournment petition on various dates, no specific explanation was given as to why the assessee did not appear on 4/4/2019. At the same time, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to present its case before ld CIT(A). Since the assessee has not given proper explanations for not appearing before ld CIT(A) on 4/4/2019, we impose a cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) upon the assessee, which shall be paid to the credit of Income-tax Department as ‘other fees’ within one month from the date of receipt of this order by the assessee. Subject to the payment of above cost, we set aside the order passed by ld CIT(A) and restore all the issue to the file of ld CIT(A) for examining it afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.