IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.177/SRT/2017 (AY 2013-14) (H EARING IN VIRTUAL COURT) SANDEEP KANTILAL BHOJANI, 5, GOPAL DARSHAN SOCIETY, BEHIND MANISHNAGAR, NR, AKSHARWADI, DABHOLI ROAD, SURAT-395004 E-MAIL DMSHINGALA@YAHOO.COM PH:9825128255 PAN : A EUPB 5413 L VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1), SURAT. APPLICANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SH. RUSHI PAREKH ADVOCATE REVENUE BY MS. ANUPAMA SINGLA SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 09.06.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09.06 .2021 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : 1. THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, SURAT DATED 3008.07.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2013-14. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER: 1) THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED PASSING THE ORDER EX-PARTY WITHOUT GRANTING OPPORTUNITY. 2) THAT THE LD CIT(A) PASSED ORDER WITHOUT SERVING NOTICE OF HEARING ON ASSESSEE. 3) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 54B. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS COMPLETED ON 26/02/2016 UNDER SECTION 143(3). THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 54B, BY TAKING VIEW THAT THE ASSESSE FAILED TO SATISFY THE REQUISITE CONDITIONS. ITA NO.177/SRT/2017 (AY 2013-14 ) SUDIP KANTILAL BHOJANI 2 ON APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A)THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS AFFIRMED. THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN EX-PARTY ORDER BY TAKING VIEW THAT DESPITE GRANTING A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY THE NOTICES. FURTHER AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (SR DR) FOR THE REVENUE. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF LD CIT(A) WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSE HAS CHANGED HIS ADDRESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS GOOD CASE ON MERIT AND IS LIKELY TO SUCCEED IF THE ASSESSEE IS HEARD ON MERIT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE UNDERTAKE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE MORE VIGILANT IN FUTURE AND THE ASSESSEE WILL FURNISH HIS EMAIL ADDRESS AS WELL AS TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR COMMUNICATION OF THE HEARING BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IN ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) IS NOT ON MERIT OF THE CASE. 4. THE LD. SR. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN FOUR OPPORTUNITY AS RECORDED IN PAGE 4 OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) LEFT WITH NO OPTION, EXCEPT TO PROCEED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OR EXPLANATION AFFIRM THE ACTION OF AO. IN ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION, THE LD. SR. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT IN CASE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL IS DEEM APPROPRIATE, THE ASSESSEE BE DIRECTED TO BE VIGILANT AND NOT ITA NO.177/SRT/2017 (AY 2013-14 ) SUDIP KANTILAL BHOJANI 3 TO DEFAULT IN ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS AND TO WASTE THE TIME OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES/LD.CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION OF LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) FIXED THE HEARING ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AS MENTIONED IN PARA 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS RECORDED BY LD. CIT(A) THAT NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, FIND THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS NOT RECORDED HIS SATISFACTION THAT THE NOTICE SENT THROUGH SPEED POST WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. WE INSTEAD OF GOING INTO CONTROVERSY, WHETHER THE ASSESSEE DEFAULTED IN ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE OR NOT, BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANDATE OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT MANDATES THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL IS REQUIRED TO PASS ORDER ON POINTS OF DETERMINATION (GROUNDS OF APPEALS), DECISION THEREIN ON AND REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) TO DECIDE ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO ORDER THAT BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL GRANT FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AS AND WHEN THE DATE OF HEARING AND TO PROVIDE ALL NECESSARY EVIDENCE AND INFORMATION WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY AND NOT TO SEEK THE ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT ANY VALID REASONS. THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER DIRECTED TO ITA NO.177/SRT/2017 (AY 2013-14 ) SUDIP KANTILAL BHOJANI 4 PROVIDE HIS E-MAIL ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER TO MAKE COMMUNICATION WITH HIM OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. THE ASSESSEE SHALL FILE HIS LATEST ADDRESS AND E- MAIL ADDRESS AND HIS TELEPHONE NUMBER OR OF HIS REPRESENTATIVE, WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE IN THE OFFICE OF ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE JURISDICTIONAL CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BY ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER ANNOUNCED ON 9 TH JUNE 2021 AT THE TIME OF HEARING IN VIRTUAL COURT HEARING. SD/- SD/- (DR ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER SURAT, DATED: 09/06/2021 / SELF COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, SURAT