Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jalandhar V. ACIT,Intl. Taxation,Circle, Chandigarh

ITA 188/CHANDI/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1397 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA DHAR
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Set aside

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ “एकल सद यीय’, च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘SMC’ CHANDIGARH ीमती दवा संह, या#यक सद य BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 188/CHD/2021 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Kuldip Singh, Patti Purewal, Tehsil – Nakodar, Shankar (Jalandhar). बनाम VS The ACIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh. थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: EVUPS0511R अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क! ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate For Shri J.S.Bhasin, Advocate राज व क! ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR स ु नवाई क! तार&ख/Date of Hearing : 08.06.2022 उदघोषणा क! तार&ख/Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2022 आदेश/ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the order dated 25.06.2019 of CIT(A)-43 Delhi is challenged on the following grounds : 1. That the Id.CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal ex- parte for the alleged non appearance, when no notice of hearing was received by assessee. 2. That the Id.CIT(A) has wrongly observed that the assessee was not interested in pursing the appeal and had no submission to substantiate his claim. 3. That the impugned order is liable to be set aside, as Id.CIT(A) was not competent in law to dismiss the appeal in limine without adjudication of the issues in appeal. 4. That the order under appeal is against equity, fair play and natural justice. ITA/188/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 2 of 5 2. At the time of hearing, an application had been filed on behalf of the ld. AR pleading inability on account of medical reasons to be present. 3. Mr. T.M.Singh appearing as Proxy Counsel relying upon the application of the ld. AR pleading inability to be present on account of medical reasons requested for condonation of delay in terms of the condonation of delay application on record. It was his submission that the delay has occurred on account of the Covid restrictions. 4. The ld. Sr.DR considering the record had no objection to the delay occurred in filing of the present appeal. 5. I have heard the submissions and perused the material on record. In the light of the submissions of the parties before the Bench, the delay pointed out by the Registry is condoned as it is on account of the Covid restrictions and the issue stands addressed by orders of the Apex Court. Reference may be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Suo Motu Writ Petition {Civil) No 3 of 2020 where the Hon'ble Apex Court had been pleased to extend the period of limitation till further orders. 6. The ld. counsel inviting attention to the application on record submitted that the assessment was made vide ex- parte order requiring the assessee to explain the investments ITA/188/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 3 of 5 made in M/s Bajaj Allianz Insurance Company. Reference to the application filed by the ld. AR, was made. Relying on the same it was his submission that the assessee is a Non Resident Indian living in U.K. as per para 3 of the said application. The assessment has been reopened on account of investments made in Insurance Policies of M/s Bajaj Allianz Insurance Company. On account of some miscommunication of notice etc. to the assessee, the assessment was concluded ex-parte. The assessee challenged this before the ld. CIT(A) and after not receiving notice for a very long time, the counsel of the assessee followed up with the Commissioner’s office and was informed that the appeal stood dismissed and the order may be seen uploaded on the portal. Accordingly, in these facts, it was his limited prayer that the impugned order which is an ex- parte order wherein the assessee could not participate in the proceedings due to the circumstances beyond his control may be set aside back to the file of the ld. CIT(A). 7. Considering the record, the ld. Sr.DR did not oppose the said request. 8. I have heard the submissions and perused the material on record. A perusal of the same shows that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) holding as under : ITA/188/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 4 of 5 “4.1 The case was first fixed for hearing on 29/05/2019. No one appeared on behalf of the appellant. The case was again fixed for hearing on 25.06.2019 and was given a final opportunity. There was no compliance from the appellant's side. The notices were sent by email as well as speed post. 4.2 As there has been no compliance, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal and does not have any submission to substantiate his claim. The appeal is therefore dismissed.” 9. Accordingly, on a consideration thereof, it is seen that the said order cannot be upheld in the eyes of law in terms of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act which mandates that, “Commissioner(Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. Accordingly, in terms of the prayer of the parties before the Bench, the impugned order is set aside back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to pass an order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. While so directing, it is made clear that it is hoped that the opportunity so provided to the assessee in good faith is utilized by participating fully and fairly before the CIT (A) and is not abused. In the eventuality of abuse, it is made clear that the Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass a speaking order in accordance with law on the basis of material available on record. Said order was pronounced in the open Court on the date of hearing itself. ITA/188/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 5 of 5 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30 th June,2022. Sd/- ( दवा संह ) (DIVA SINGH) या#यक सद य/Judicial Member “प ू नम” आदेश क! त,ल-प अ.े-षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant – 2. . यथ / The Respondent 3. .आयकर आय ु /त/ CIT 4. .आयकर आय ु /त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. -वभागीय त न2ध, आयकर अपील&य आ2धकरण, च4डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar