LATE ANITA DODA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR DISHA KHANNA AND ISHA DANGI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(3), , JPR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 812/JPR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 April 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR. M. L. MEENA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the CIT(A) erred in passing the ex-parte order without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without appreciating the facts of the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 9 days due to unfortunate events including the death of the primary assessee, who was aged and ill. The assessee contended that the impugned order was passed ex-parte without adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. SANDEP GOSAIN & DR. M. L. MEENA

Hearing: 12.03.2024Pronounced: 10.04.2024

The appeals by the assessee is filed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC/CIT(A)), Delhi dated 17.10.2023 in respect of Assessment Years 2012-13.

Assessment Years: 2012-13 2. There was a delay of 9 days in filing the appeal. The Ld. AR submitted that the Id. CIT (A)/NFAC’s Order u/s 250 is dated 17.10.2023 (hereinafter referred as impugned order), Accordingly, the appeal was to be filed on/before 17.11.2023 however, the same has been filed on dated 25.12.2023 with a delay of 9 days because Lt. Smt. Anita Doda aged 78 years residing at 5-DA-9, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur being a very aged person and a senior citizen, who was not conversant and compatible with the fast technological developments, which were taking place as continuously being adapted by the Income Tax Department and further, due to age she was bad ridden and finally expired on 06.01.2021 (Copy of death certificate is enclosed and marked as "Annexure —A. Thus, due to unfortunate events, the assessee (through L/ H) was not able to file the appeal. He prayed that short delay of 9 days may be condoned. The Ld. DR has no objection to the request of the council of the assessee. Accordingly, the short delay of 9 days in filing the appeal is here by condoned and the appeal is admitted on merits of the case.

3.

The Id. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in passing the impugned order ex-parte, in a haste without affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Assessment Years: 2012-13 4. At the time of hearing the Ld. AR contended that the impugned order has been passed exparte qua the appellant, in gross violation of principles of natural justice, in confirming the additions made on account of the alleged Long Term 4. Capital Gain in contravention to the provisions of law and facts of the case. kindly be quashed or alternatively be restored to the file of the Id. CIT(A).

4.

Per Contra, the learned additional CIT (DR) has no objection to the request of the council of the assesse.

5.

Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex parte qua the assesse. The Ld. AR argued that the worthy CIT(A) decided the case exparte without valid service of notice at the address given in column 17 of form no. 35 of the appeal Memo and that while deciding the case ex-parte, the Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the facts of the case and arbitrary confirmed the assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act. It is seen that neither the AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) has addressed the relevant issue on merits of the case. He requested that in view of principles of natural justice, the matter may be sent back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal afresh as the Assessment Years: 2012-13 assasse undertake to present his case before the CIT(A) with detailed submissions for that the learned additional CIT (DR) has no objection.

6.

In the present case, the assessee could have placed evidence before the first appellate authority if he has been provided adequate opportunity of being heard. In view of the principles of natural justice, we consider it deem fit to restore back the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal afresh after considering the written submission and evidence filed on record and may be filed during the Proceedings. The CIT(A) is directed to grant sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesse and to issue a Show Cause Notice, and thereafter pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. The assesse shall cooperate before the CIT(A).

9.

Accordingly, Assessment order set aside and matter remanded to the CIT(A) to pass order as per law.

10.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court as on 10.04.2024

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →