SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, SIKAR

ITA 179/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3793 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANMOHAN KANDPAL ACITOSDDR DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 69

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH JESK LH-'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE : SHRI RAMESH C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 179/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT S/O SHRI BUDH SINGH SHEKHAWAT POLO GROUND, RAMLILA MAIDAN KE PASS, SIKAR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 3, SIKAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ATHPS 7991 N VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIEYA AND SHRI DEVANG GARGIEYA, ADVOCATE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI MANMOHAN KANDPAL, ACIT(OSD)-DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 30/10/2019 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 /10/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER RAMESH C. SHARMA, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-3, JAIPUR DATED 20-12-2018 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2009-10, IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. A CT, 1961. 2.1 THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO D ISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING DUE AND PROPER OPPOR TUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.179/JP/2019 SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT VS ITO, WARD- 3,S IKAR 2 2.2 IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE THA T ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS NOT PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN AS MUCH AS THE LD. CIT(A) ADJOURNED THE CASE ON THE RE QUEST OF THE A/R ON THREE OCCASIONS HOWEVER ON 06.11.2018, WHEN ADV. RAHMAN KHAN ATTENDED AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURN FOR 19.12.20 18 BUT UNFORTUNATELY BECAUSE OF SOME COMMUNICATION GAP AND CONFUSION BETWEEN HIM AND THE STAFF IN THE OFFICE, THE NEXT D ATE COULD BE NOTED IN THE OFFICE DIARY ON 06.12.2018 AND NOT ON 19.12. 2018. ACCORDINGLY, ON 06.12.2018, WHEN ATTENDED, THE STAF F OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TOLD THAT THE ABOVE APPEAL WAS PERHAPS TRANSFER RED TO THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR AND NEW NOTICE WILL COME. THIS WAY, N O FURTHER DATE COULD BE NOTED BY THE LD.AR. CONSEQUENTLY, ON 19.12 .2018, MATTER COULD NOT BE ATTENDED. BUT THEREAFTER THE APPELLANT /AR NEVER GOT ANY NOTICE OF FINAL HEARING NOR ANY COMMUNICATION GRANT ING A FINAL OPPORTUNITY. 2.3 IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSES SEE THAT THE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY FILED AN APPEAL PHYSICALLY IN PAPER FORM ON DATED 17-01-2017 UNDER THE RELEVANT PROVISION OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, WITHIN THE PERMISSIBLE TIME LIMIT HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING THE HEARING THE APPEAL, MERELY ON THE BASIS OF THE ALLEGED DEFAULT OF NOT FILING THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY. FURTHER THE APPEL LANT EVEN ALSO FILED THE ITA NO.179/JP/2019 SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT VS ITO, WARD- 3,S IKAR 3 APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY ON DATED 12-10-2018 BUT REMAI NING UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE CONDONATION OF DELAY IN SUCH CA SES IS TECHNICAL AND STANDS WAIVED AUTOMATICALLY WITHOUT ANYTHING TO BE DONE ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT. THE PROVISION WAS BROUGHT FOR THE FI RST TIME AND TECHNICALLY IT WAS TOO DIFFICULT TO COMPLY WITH. TH EREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ADMITTED THE APPEAL AND THE DEFAULT O F NOT PRAYING FOR CONDONATION ON DELAY IN SUCH A MATTER WAS A HIGHLY TECHNICAL AND VENIAL BREACH OF LAW, FOR WHICH, THE APPELLANT SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO SUFFER, MORE PARTICULARLY, WHEN THE NATURE OF THE ISSUE IS SUCH THAT PRIMA FACE IT IS COVERED BY THE DECISIONS OF HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR AND HON'BLE ITAT JODHPUR AND OTHERWISE ALSO IS A STRONGLY ARGUABLE C ASE. 2.4 WITH RESPECT TO MERIT OF ADDITION, IT WAS ARGUE D BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS EXAMINATI ON WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 4.00 LACS U/ S 69 OF THE ACT. 2.5 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GON E THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 4.00 LACS WAS MADE BY THE AO U/S 69 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUN T OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE MANUALLY FILED THE APEALON 17-01-2017 AND SUBSEQUENTLY E-FILED THE APPEAL ON 12-10-2018 WHIC H WAS DELAYED. AS PER THE LD. CIT(A), THE EXTENSION WAS PERMITTED BY CBDT TILL 15-06- 2016. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS D ISMISSED. I HAVE ITA NO.179/JP/2019 SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT VS ITO, WARD- 3,S IKAR 4 GONE THROUGH THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY AND FOUND TH AT WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ORIGINALLY THE APPEAL WAS FILED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT. IN THE SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I RESTORE T HE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE ON MERIT BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE AS SESSEE . THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITHIN A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED IN PART FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/10/2019 . SD/- JESK LH 'KEKZ (RAMESH C. SHARMA) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 31 /10/ 2019 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SAJJAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT , SIKAR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-3, SIKAR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A), 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.179/JP/2019) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR