Sh. Virbhadra Singh Through L/H Smt. Pratibha Singh, Shimla V. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

ITA 149/CHANDI/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0443 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Assessment record

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 149/CHD/2023 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Virbhadra Singh, Through Legal Heir Smt. Pratibha Singh of Late Shri Virbhadra Singh, Holly Lodge, Jakhoo, Shimla -171001 Vs. बनाम The DCIT, Circle, Shimla èथायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ALRPS6513N अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent (VIRTUAL HEARING) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 30.10.2023 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain, Vice President: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.01.2023, for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. At the outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the sole grievance of the Assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) 149-Chd-2023 – Shri Virbhadra Singh, Shimla 2 has concluded the proceedings by passing an ex-parte order without proper perusal of the assessment record and dismissed the appeal of the Assessee by upholding the order of the Assessing Officer; that all the notices of hearing had been sent on the incorrect email-id, though the Assessee had updated his new email-id, which was ignored and no notice of hearing was ever received by the Assessee and, therefore, no response to such notices was filed. It has further been submitted that ld. CIT(A) has simply reproduced the order of the Assessing Officer upto page 9; that the ld. CIT(A) mentioned that since there was no response on the part of the Assessee, the issue was decided without discussing anything on merits; and that as such the action of the ld. CIT(A) in upholding the order of the AO is not justified as the Assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for non- appearance before ld. CIT(A). Furthermore, the ld. CIT(A) has also erred in making the addition on account of surrender of LIC policies, which was claimed exempt in the original return filed by the Assessee and accepted by the Assessing Officer. It has further been submitted that the impugned order of the Assessing Officer, confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), by passing an ex-parte order is totally unfair, arbitrary and unjustified. It is submitted that the Assessee has a fair case on merits and, therefore, prayed that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the Assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing 149-Chd-2023 – Shri Virbhadra Singh, Shimla 3 of the appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and the appeal may be directed to be decided de novo on merits. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 4. Heard. We have gone through the order of the ld. CIT (A) and find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee ex- parte by merely upholding the order of the Assessing Officer, without considering the material available on record, and also without going into the merits of the case. As such, an opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the Assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit. The ld. D.R., though, has placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below, but has no objection if the matter is remanded to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. 5. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the matter is remitted to the file of the CIT(A), to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 149-Chd-2023 – Shri Virbhadra Singh, Shimla 4 6. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed. Order pronounced on 30.10.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member Vice President Dated : 30.10.2023 “आर.के.” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु Èत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar