SHRI RAJU LAL MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD -7(3), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 151/JPR/2020Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 February 2022AY 2012-133 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's consistent non-appearance and concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed ex parte.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13. The assessee neither appeared before the AO, CIT(A), nor the ITAT, consistently filing adjournment applications.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear before the tax authorities, leading to an ex parte assessment and appeal decision. The grounds also included the validity of jurisdiction under Section 148 and the addition of unexplained cash credits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “SMC”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 151/JP/2020

Hearing: 20/01/2022Pronounced: 28/02/2022

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 20/05/2019 for the A.Y. 2012-13, wherein following grounds have been taken:

1.

“1. That the ld. A.O. has erred in law as well as in facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction U/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2.

That the ld. A.O. has erred in law as well as in facts of the case in considering total cash deposit into bank accounts of Rs. 15,99,000/- as well as credit entries i.e. saving bank interest of Rs. 1,551/- as unexplained cash credits and thereby made addition to the tune of Rs. 16,00,551/- to the returned income.

3. That both the lower authorities have erred in law as well as in facts of the case in not affording sufficient opportunity of being heard, hence, violated the principle of natural justice.

2 ITA 151/JP/2020_ Sh. Raju Lal Meena Vs ITO 4. That the appellant reserves his right to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal on or before hearing of this appeal.”

2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic.

3.

In this appeal, on several dates, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, even today i.e. on 20/01/2022, neither the assessee nor his representative joined the proceedings and only adjournment application has been submitted. In earlier on many of the occasions, only adjournment applications had been moved, therefore, in such circumstances we proceed the assessee ex parte.

4.

On the other hand, the ld DR, who joined the proceedings is ready with the arguments, therefore, we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the present case ex parte.

5.

Having considered the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. Since, nobody has appeared on behalf of the assessee for the several dates and only adjournment application has been moved. From perusal of the record, we also noticed that the A.O. passed assessment order ex parte because the assessee or his authorized representative had not appeared during the assessment proceedings before the A.O. We also noticed that even before the ld. CIT(A), on many of the occasions, neither the assessee nor the authorized representative

3 ITA 151/JP/2020_ Sh. Raju Lal Meena Vs ITO had appeared to represent the case of the assessee, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal of the assessee on the basis of material available on record. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that seeing the act of the assessee of the present appeal, he is not interested to pursue the appeal, therefore, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee by confirming the order of the ld. CIT(A).

6.

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th February, 2022.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼MkW- ehBk YkkYk ehuk½ ¼lanhi x®lkÃa½ (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28/02/2022 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Raju Lal Meena, Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward 7(3), Jaipur. 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. 151/JP/2020) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →