M/S MEGRI SOFT LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

आदेश/ORDER PER DIVA SINGH The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 19/12/2017 of CIT(A)-2 Chandigarh pertaining to 2013–14 assessment year on various grounds including ground No. 1 which reads as under : “That the impugned order is against facts and law.” 2. The Ld. AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that the appeal of the assessee challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(b) was confirmed by an ex-parte order holding that on the specific date of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. Inviting attention to application dated 24/05/2018 filed in the present proceedings it was his prayer that the said application is annexed with an affidavit of the assessee addressing the correct and true facts qua the issue. Reading from paragraph 3 of the said application it was his prayer; “That the correct facts about the above appeal is that on the appointed date of hearing on 04.12.2017, the appeal of the assessee against Quantum Assessment u/s 144 as well as the above referred appeal against penalty u/s 271(1)(b)listed for hearing before Worthy

ITA 285/CHD/2016 A.Y.2013-14 Page 2 of 2

CIT(A). The appellant sought adjournment in both appeals through a single consolidated adjournment application and the matter was adjourned to a subsequent date. In fact, the appeal against Quantum Assessment is still pending adjudication before Worthy CIT(A). However, it appears that the said adjournment application was .filed in the file of appeal against Quantum Assessment and copy thereof was not filed in the file of appeal against above penalty. Thereafter, the Worthy CIT(A) believed that the appellant had not appeared and therefore it is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. This resulted into passing of ex-parte appellate order. (emphasis provided) 2.1. On the basis of the same it was his limited prayer that the impugned order may be set aside back to the said authority to pass an order after hearing the assessee. 3. Considering the application supported by way of an affidavit the Ld. Sr.DR did not object to the prayer for remand of the appeal. 4. Accordingly in the light of the submissions of the parties before the Bench, the issues in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case are sent back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee in its own interests is advised to utilize this opportunity by making full and proper compliances before the said authority. Said order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself 5. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16.11.2018. Sd/- Sd/-

( डा. बी.आर.आर. कुमार) (�दवा �संह ) (Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member “पूनम” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant – 2.��यथ�/ The Respondent – 3.आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4.आयकर आयु�त 1. (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar ITAT,Chandigarh.