MRS. PUJA MOHAN,KOLKATA vs. CIT(APPEAL)-9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The only ground is to be decided in this appeal as to whether the CIT-A justified in passing order exparte without considering the adjournment petition as filed by the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.

It was submitted that the assessee is an individual and derives income from salary. Under intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the CPC [ Centralized Processing Centre ] wherein assessee was assessed with income from capital gains. Consequent upon intimation U/Sec. 143(1), the assessee found mistakes in her return shown income under the head Mrs. Puja Mohan 1 ‘ slump sale’ instead of normal capital gain and also wrongly mentioned the cost of shares in her return and was a short term capital loss. In order to rectify the error the assessee filed rectification petition u/s. 154 claiming short term capital loss, which was rejected by the AO.

The assessee challenged the same before the CIT-A and the CIT-A without considering the adjournment application of assessee passed an ex parte order confirming the action of the AO in treating the same.

Before us the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the CIT-A without considering the adjournment petition filed before him passed an ex parte order confirming the action of the AO. He also submitted that the AO failed to allow the mistake u/s. 154 of the Act and prayed to remand the case to the file of the CIT-A for fresh adjudication.

On the contrary, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below.

Heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. From the impugned order of the CIT-A, it is observed that notice u/s. 250 was issued to assessee on 20-06-2016 fixing the hearing on 28- 06-2016, on which day, the Ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for seeking adjournment. But, however, without considering the same, the CIT-A passed an ex parte order on 30-06-2016. In support of the contention the Ld.AR of the assessee placed a copy of the letter dated 28-06-2016 stating that the notice intimating the date of hearing was received only on 27.06.2016 and sought adjournment on the ground that the Authorised Representative, Sri Pankaj Kakarania was out of Station. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand the case to the file of the CIT-A for fresh adjudication. The assessee shall be at liberty to file/produce evidences, if any to substantiate her claim and shall co- operate with the CIT-A in the appellate proceeding for speedy disposal of ITA No. 1692/Kol/16 Mrs. Puja Mohan 2 the appeal. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 8.