RAVI KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 4(2), JAIPUR

1 ITA NO.316/JP/2024 RAVI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 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. 316/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Ravi Kumar Jain cuke The ITO Vs. 117, Narsinghpura Near Pink Peral Ward – 4(2) Water Park, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AGSPJ 7351 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Anoop Bhatia, 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 18-01-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2020-21 raising grounds of appeal at Form No. 36. 2.1 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:-

2 ITA NO.316/JP/2024 RAVI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 5. In Ground no. 1 to 5 appellant has challenged the addition amounting to Rs. 12,59,803/- on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 57 of the I.T. Act. The assessee has not submitted any explanation regarding the source of these credits in bank a/c. which are the main issue in this case. Other grounds of appeal are general in nature. Several opportunities have been allowed to the appellant in terms of the notices fixed for hearing of the appeal under section 250 of the Act issued to the appellant. No compliance has been made by the appellant till date. The details of the opportunities allowed to the appellant to represent in this case are tabulated as under:- DIN No. Date of Notice Date of hearing Remarks fixed 1056789572 05-10-2023 20-10-2023 No reply 1057954977 15-11-2023 30-11-2023 No reply 1058955930 21-12-2023 01-01-2024 No reply 6. The aforesaid non compliances reveals beyond doubt that the appellant has nothing to say in the matter-of-present appeal. Thus, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed on this ground itself. The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum " TBUS,NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT. Considering the facts and relying on the decision of the Hon'ble, ITAT, Delhi Bench, in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38-ITD- 320 and the judgement of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT (1997) reported in 223-ITR-480 the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. The appellant has raised grounds of appeal No. 1 to 5 which challenged the addition of amount of Rs. 12,59,803/- on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 57 of the I.T. Act. AO has noticed that assessee has not filed its return of income. He was given numerous opportunities during assessment proceedings. Appellant has raised dispute on addition in grounds of appeal but he has not provided any cogent explanation in support of his contention. It is to be noted that because, non prosecution on the part of appellant, appeal is already decided by me in para '6' of this order. In view of the above Grounds of Appeal No. 1 to 5 are hereby dismissed.

3 ITA NO.316/JP/2024 RAVI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 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 as 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. However, for lethargic and negligent action on the part of the assessee, a cost of Rs.2,000/- is imposed on the assessee and the same may be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and copy of the same shall be submitted to the AO for proof and 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. Thus, the assessee will not seek any 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

4 ITA NO.316/JP/2024 RAVI KUMAR JAIN VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR 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 Ravi Kumar Jain, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO , Ward-4(2), Bhiwadi 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. 316/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत