VIMLA,RAMGARH ,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 300/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Smt. Vimla The ITO Vs. W/o Shri Chiman Lal Ward – 1(3) Near Sabji Mandi, Rambagh Alwar Alwar 301 020 LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AQNPV 2446A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Ashok Kanodia, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 02/05/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28 /05/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 09-08-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2012-13 raising grounds of appeal at Form No. 36. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that there is delay of 156 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the assessee has submitted a petition cum affidavit for condonation of delay praying therein that the assessee aged of 47

2 ITA NO. 300/JP/2024 SMT. VIMLA VS ITO, WARD 1(3), ALWAR years is uneducated lady and not conversant with information technology and she is unable to view the mail and thus she remained ignorant with the appeal order passed by the ld.CIT(A). She further submitted that she lacks of access of E-Mail and physical copy of ld CIT(A)’s order never received nor any communication was received on her mobile. When the demand was insisted to pay by the Department in the month of first week of 5th Jan. 2024 then she contacted her counsel who after going through the portal for New E Payment System and TAB E proceedings informed that the ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the demand raised by the AO. Thus, she first time came to know that her appeal has been rejected. Consequently, she submitted that there exists reasonable cause due to which she was prevented to file the appeal within time and delay was beyond her control and thus her appeal deserves to be admitted. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld.DR submitted that the Court may decide the issue as deem fit and proper in the case. 2.3 After hearing both the parties and perusing the documents placed before the Bench, it is noted that there is merit in the submission of the assessee . Hence, the delay is condoned 3.1 Further, at the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee and the narration as mentioned therein are as under:-

3 ITA NO. 300/JP/2024 SMT. VIMLA VS ITO, WARD 1(3), ALWAR ‘’From a perusal of the assessment order it is observed that the AO has passed a reasoned order where the appellant failed to explain the nature and source of amount of Rs.35,45,000/- deposited in cash to her bank account. The appellant failed to justify during the appellate proceedings as to how the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO is bad in law and was based on wrong facts. Ground No. 2 is therefore dismissed. Ground No. 3 is general in nature and need not be adjudicated. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any infirmity in the order of the AO and , therefore, dismiss the appeal of the appellant. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.’’ . 3.2 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it is noted that the assessee has not filed any submissions and evidences relating to the case before the ld. CIT(A) and thus the ld.CIT(A) has no other alternative except to confirm the action of the AO being the assessee remained ex-parte before the AO. It is also noted that the ld. AR of the assessee prayed for one more chance to contest the case before the AO while the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). The Bench feels that one more chance may be given to the Assessee to contest the case before the AO for afresh adjudication and the assessee will submit the necessary documents / evidences concerning the above mentioned appeal. Thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing. The assessee will not seek any

4 ITA NO. 300/JP/2024 SMT. VIMLA VS ITO, WARD 1(3), ALWAR adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3.3 Before parting, the Bench makes it clear that Bench decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by AO independently in accordance with law. 4.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 28 /05/2024. Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28 /05/2024 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Shri Vimla, Alwar 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO , Ward-1(2), Alwar 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 300/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत