Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: MS. DIVA SINGH & Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR
PER DIVA SINGH The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)-4 Ludhiana is challenged on various grounds on merit including Ground No. 2 on the grounds of natural justice. The specific ground reads as under : “That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Ludhiana is unjustified in passing Ex-parte order without giving proper and reasonable opportunity to the appellant which is against the principles of Equity and Natural Justice.” 2. However, before we address the same, it is seen that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 26 days. On going through the Condonation of delay application filed by the assessee, it is seen that the assessee cites that being a 50 years old widow suffering from multiple health problems and under medical treatment on account of which, the filing of appeal could not be attended to, as a result delay has occurred. An affidavit in support of the assertions made alongwith a Doctor’s Certificate has been filed by the assessee. Reliance is placed upon the case of Manoj Ahuja & another V Inspecting ACIT, 150 ITR 696 (P&H) and Collector, Land Acquisition V Mst. Katiji & others 167 ITR 471 (S.C). It is the prayer of the assessee that delay may be condoned. 3. Considering the material available on record, the delay is condoned.
ITA 1323/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 Page 2 of 2
Addressing the impugned order, the ld. AR submitted that the additions made by the AO were assailed in appeal and the assessee did appear on different dates and sought time, however, on the last date i.e. 19.05.2017, the assessee could not appear, probably due to the health reasons etc. and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed upholding the assessment order without addressing the grievance of the assessee which was addressed in the detailed grounds raised. Accordingly, it was his submission that the order was a non-speaking order and the same may be remanded to the CIT(A) for addressing this defect. 5. The ld. Sr.DR considering the material available on record, had no objection to the said prayer. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is seen that the assessee is deriving income from house property and received Constituency Allowance from MCL. Additions were made by the AO considering the deposits in the three bank accounts of the assessee. The additions were challenged in appeal before the CIT(A). However, presumably on account of ill health etc., the assessee could not brief the counsel and sought adjournments which lead to the dismissal of the appeal. In the circumstances, accepting oral undertaking given by the ld. AR Mr.Harry Rikhy, in the interest of substantial justice, the impugned order is set aside back to the file of the CIT(A) with the 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 the opportunity so provided should not be abused by the assessee and is utilized fully and fairly by making proper compliances. In the eventuality of abuse of the same, we make it clear that CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass an order on the basis of material available on record. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 27.03. 2018. Sd/- Sd/-
(Dr. B.R.R.KUMAR) (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.