SANJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, SIKAR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 76/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Chiranji Panwari Ki Gali, Ward-1, Sikar. Sikar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADIPA 5507 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gangieya (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 03/03/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 06/03/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 05/10/2016 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi/Camp office at Jaipur for the A.Y. 2009-10, wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The impugned penalty order U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 08/23.05.2012 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of

ITA 76/JP/2017_ 2 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs ITO

jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be quashed.

penalty of Rs. 1,93,590/- made U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,

1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act). The AR of the assessee has

submitted a prayer for modification of the grounds. However, the ld.

Sr.DR has submitted that this is not a modification of ground but the

assessee is taking a new ground in the form of ground No. 5, which can

only be taken by submitting an application for additional ground.

ITA 76/JP/2017_ 3 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs ITO

of modified grounds and perused the material available on the record.

After considering all the facts and circumstances, I fully concur with the

submission of the ld. Sr.DR that ground No. 5 taken by the assessee is

an additional ground not a modified ground. In absence of any

application for additional ground, prayer of the assessee for

modification of the grounds is not maintainable, hence, the same is

hereby dismissed.

penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The ld AR of the assessee has

submitted that the ld. CIT(A) was on tour i.e. in the camp office at

Jaipur and no proper and effective opportunity of hearing was given to

the assessee, therefore, opportunity for hearing may be granted and

the issue may be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A). Ld. Sr. DR

opposed the submissions of the ld. AR for setting aside the issue to the

file of ld. CIT(A).

material available on the record. It is noticed that the order made by

the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order. The ld. CIT(A) was on tour to Jaipur

and the circumstances suggest that the assessee was deprived of

ITA 76/JP/2017_ 4 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs ITO proper and adequate opportunity of being heard, therefore I am of the

view that, in the interest of justice, it will be fair and just to restore the

issue in appeal to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The ld. CIT(A)

shall provide proper and effective opportunity of being heard to the

assessee. Accordingly, this issue is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

Order pronounced in the open court on 06/03/2017.

Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 06th March, 2017 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, Sikar. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-1, Sikar. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 76/JP/2017) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत