Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH, ‘B’, BANGALORE
PER LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -4, Bangalore dated 3rd Mar, 2012 for the assessment year 2009-10.
ITA No. /B/15 2
The assessee has raised the following grounds of app The assessee has raised the following grounds of app The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of electrical industrial suppliers and filed return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 30/0/2009 declaring a total income of Rs.4,13,350/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice was issue to assessee u/s 132(2). The AR of the assessee furnished the information called for and the case was heard.
We have gone through the order passed by the learned CIT(A).
The CIT(A) dismissed it in limini on the ground that the assessee has not provided any information and the learned CIT(A) had reproduced the letter filed by the Advocate Shri Janardhan Naidu at para 2 of the order, which reads as under :
"The appellant referred to above is not contacting us though we have represented the case at the assessment stage. With repeated reminders, the assessee is not responding to the phone calls and not co-operating in any manner to represent the case before the appellate authority. Under the circumstances, we are unable to represent the case before your Honour. We therefore request you to send further notices to the following address: Smt. Bharathi Join, Propx.: Mahaveer Electrical Industrial Suppliers, No. 209-210, S J Building, BCIE Ltd., 12th KM, Old Madras Road, Dooravaninagar, Near to Union Bank of India, Krishnarajapuram,
Bangalore-5600l6. Contact No. : 080-28533708 Mobile: 9449765907, 9731458550”
Before us, the learned AR drawn our attention to additional grounds filed before us to the following effect. “1. I had Appointed Mr. K Janardhan Naidu to Represent before CIT (A) against Order Passed by Assessing Officer (AO). 2. I had provided all the related information and Document for to represent before CIT (A) before i could go to my native place ie., Rajastan for my Treatment purpose. 3. However Mr. K Janardhan Naidu has taken the advantage of my poor health condition and had not even represented before CIT (A) on time. Further without my Knowledge Mr. K Janardhan Naidu has given in writing to CIT (A) stating that I have not provided him the required documents. Further Mr. K Janardhan Naidu even didn't bother to inform me regarding this matter. 4. Further CIT (A) has Passed the Order based on Written Representative received from the Representative.”
The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee neither filed any document nor cooperated with the advocate and, therefore, the proceedings were initiated against her by treating her ex-parte and the order passed by the AO was confirmed.
If we look into the reason given by the assessee before us, in our view, the reasons given are plausible and it is a fit case for sending the file back to the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal in accordance with law. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee and needless to say that assessee may file any document which she feels appropriate and proper for the just and fair adjudication of the case before the CIT(A).
The learned CIT(A) shall consider the request of additional documents if any filed in due earnest and also to give due regard to past history of the case where it is alleged that the AR of the assessee has not filed any document before the CIT(A) despite being asked for.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15th March, 2017.