SATISH KUMAR KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 5(4) JAIPUR, JAIPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal was directed against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2012-13. The CIT(A) had passed the order due to the assessee's failure to submit arguments or evidence. The assessee requested another opportunity to present their case.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not filed submissions or evidence before the CIT(A). While the CIT(A) had confirmed the AO's action, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity to contest the case before the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after an ex-parte order was passed due to non-submission of arguments and evidence.
Sections Cited
Section 5.1, Section 5.4
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. 74/JP/2024
1 ITA NO. 74/JP/2024 SATISH KUMAR KHANDELWAL VS ITO, WARD 5(4), JAIPUR आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Mk0 ehBk yky ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR MITHA LAL MEENA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 74/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Satish Kumar Khandelwal cuke The ITO Vs. 85-A, Anaj Mandi, Surajpole Ward 5(4) Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHRPK 9471 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Mrs. Suhani Maharwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 12/03/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 14 /03/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 28-11-2023, 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 the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order observing that 5.1…..’’the assessee has not submitted any argument much less any evidence in support of the grounds of appeal. Therefore, the order is
2 ITA NO. 74/JP/2024 SATISH KUMAR KHANDELWAL VS ITO WARD 5(4), JAIPUR passed on the basis of the material already available on record. It is also noted at para 5.4 that ‘’…..The assesssee had not responded to the above show cause notice. In this ground the asessee has not made any argument as to why in absence of documentary evidence in support of the claimed expenditure, the same should be allowed. In absence of any fresh argument much less any documentary evidence this ground is also dismissed. Hence, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed. 2.2 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. It is also noted that the ld. AR of the assessee prayed for one more chance to contest the case before the ld.CIT(A) while as the ld. DR relied on the orders of the ld. CIT(A). The Bench feels that one more chance may be given to the Assessee to contest the case before the ld.CIT(A) and the appeal is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) 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, the assessee is awarded cost of Rs.2,000/- and the same may be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and copy of the same shall be submitted to the ld CIT(A) for proof and thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity
3 ITA NO. 74/JP/2024 SATISH KUMAR KHANDELWAL VS ITO WARD 5(4), JAIPUR of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 2.3 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 14 /03/2024. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ Mk0 ehBk yky ehuk ½ ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ (Dr. Mitha Lal Meena) (Sandeep Gosain) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 14 /03/2024 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Satish Kumar Khandelwal, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward 5(4) ,Jaipur 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. 74/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत
