Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
O R D E R Per A. K. GARODIA, A. M.: Both these appeals are filed by the assessee and the same are directed against two separate ex parte orders of ld. CIT (A) – Hubballi both dated 09.03.2018 for A. Y. 2011 – 12, one in quantum proceedings and the other in penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1) (c).
At the very outset, it was submitted by the learned AR of the assessee that it is noted by CIT (A) in Para 4.1 of his both orders that several dates of hearing were fixed by him and final opportunity was provided for hearing on 02.03.2018 but the assessee failed to appear or respond. He submitted a copy of the said final notice of hearing dated 16.02.2018 fixing the date of hearing on 02.03.2018. He submitted that in the said notice, the E. Mail address of CIT (A) is also provided as CITAhubballi@gmail.com. He submitted a copy of E. mail sent by the assessee to CIT (A) on 02.03.2018 requesting for adjournment along with Medical certificate. At this juncture, the bench wanted to know as to whether this E. Mail was sent at the same address provided by CIT (A) in his notice dated & 1646/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 3 16.02.2018. In reply, he pointed out that this E. Mail was sent at the E. Mail address “citappealshubbali@gmail.com. Thereafter, he submitted that admittedly, the request for adjournment was by mistake sent to a slightly defective address but this was unintentional and in view of the fact that the assessee was ill as per medical certificate, this mistake of the assessee should be pardoned and in the interest of justice, the matter be restored to CIT (A) for a fresh decision after hearing the assessee. Learned DR of the revenue submitted that no fresh opportunity should be provided.
We have considered the rival submissions. We find that as per the medical certificate brought on record, the assessee was hospitalized during 28.02.2018 to 01.03.2018. Even then, the assessee made efforts to make request for adjournment of final hearing fixed by CIT (A) on 02.03.2018 but the mail was sent by the assessee on a wrong address and therefore, it did not reach to CIT (A). But still, in our considered opinion, on consideration of these facts, it cannot be concluded that the assessee did not want to pursue the appeals. In the interest of justice, we feel it proper to restore the entire matter in both appeals to CIT (A) for fresh decision after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to both sides. We order accordingly. In view of this decision, no adjudication on merit is called for at the present stage. Hence, we make no comment on merit.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.