SH. RAVINDER KUMAR GOYAL,SUNAM vs. ITO, SUNAM HQ, SANGRUR

PER DIVA SINGH

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 12.04.2018 of CIT(A)-1 Ludhiana pertaining to 2009-10 assessment year on various grounds wherein the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) is assailed. 2. The ld. AR at the time of hearing, inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that initially assessee was represented by his counsel Shri Surinder Jain on which date he sought adjournment. Thereafter, notice fixing the date of hearing as 14.11.2017 was not received by the assessee. The record shows that there is no reference made to any such notice in para 2. The only date of notice mentioned is 15.09.2017. However, accepting the statement at bar made by the ld. AR that for the specific date, no notice was received. After hearing ld. Sr.DR, it was deemed appropriate to set aside the impugned order after ascertaining that the address available on record continues to remain the same. 3. The record shows that the assessee in the facts of the present case is stated to be engaged in sale of mobile coupons on wholesale basis and had declared a return of Rs. 10,45,870/-. The case was reopened after

ITA 694/CHD/2018 A.Y.2009-10 Page 2 of 2

issuing of notice u/s 148 leading assessment being concluded at an income of Rs. 22,04,230/-. The assessee challenged the addition on merit as well as the action of the AO in re-opening the case u/s 148.

3.1 In the proceedings before the CIT(A), it is noticed that on 15.09.2017, the assessee was represented by his counsel. Thereafter, the case apparently was re-fixed for hearing on two different dates wherein the assessee did not participate leading to the passing of the ex-parte order. Since specific dates are not mentioned in the order, we find that the assertions made on behalf of the assessee that notice for a specific date was not received cannot be addressed, however, the fact remains that the assessee did not participate in the proceedings allegedly on the ground that specific notice was not received. Accordingly, accepting oral undertaking given by the ld. AR, the impugned order is set aside and the issues are restored 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. While so directing, it is made clear that in the eventuality of the abuse of the trust reposed, the CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass an order on the basis of the material available on record. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04.10. 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ( DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ‘Poonam’ Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR

Asstt. Registrar ITAT,Chandigarh.