, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH !, ' # $ . .. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM ./ ITA NO. 285/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S MEGRI SOFT LTD., SCO 80, SECTOR 47D, CHANDIGARH. VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE 4(1), CHANDIGARH. ./ PAN NO: AABCC2466Q / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGARWAL, CA '# ! / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR.DR $ % #&/ DATE OF HEARING : 16.10.2018 '()* #&/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.11.2018 ')/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 19/12/2017 OF CIT(A)-2 CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 201314 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUN DS INCLUDING GROUND NO. 1 WHICH READS AS UNDER : THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS AGAINST FACTS AND LAW. 2. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUB MITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) WAS CONFIRMED BY AN EX-PARTE ORDER HOLDING THAT O N THE SPECIFIC DATE OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSE SSEE. INVITING ATTENTION TO APPLICATION DATED 24/05/2018 FILED IN THE PRE SENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THE SAID APPLICATION IS ANNEXED WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE ADDRESSING THE CORRECT AND T RUE FACTS QUA THE ISSUE. READING FROM PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE SAID APPLICATION IT W AS HIS PRAYER; THAT THE CORRECT FACTS ABOUT THE ABOVE APPEAL IS THA T ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING ON 04.12.2017, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST QUANTUM ASSESSMENT U/S 144 AS WELL AS THE A BOVE REFERRED APPEAL AGAINST PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B)LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE WORTHY ITA 285/CHD/2016 A.Y.2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 CIT(A). THE APPELLANT SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT IN BOTH APPEALS TH ROUGH A SINGLE CONSOLIDATED ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION AND T HE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO A SUBSEQUENT DATE. IN FACT, THE APPEAL AGAINST QUANTUM ASSESSMENT IS STILL PENDING ADJUDICATION BE FORE WORTHY CIT(A). HOWEVER, IT APPEARS THAT THE SAID ADJOURNMENT APPLI CATION WAS .FILED IN THE FILE OF APPEAL AGAINST QUANTUM ASSESSMEN T AND COPY THEREOF WAS NOT FILED IN THE FILE OF APPEAL AGAINST ABOVE PENA LTY. THEREAFTER, THE WORTHY CIT(A) BELIEVED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT APP EARED AND THEREFORE IT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THIS R ESULTED INTO PASSING OF EX-PARTE APPELLATE ORDER. (EMPHASIS PROVIDED) 2.1. ON THE BASIS OF THE SAME IT WAS HIS LIMITED PRAYER TH AT THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY BE SET ASIDE BACK TO THE SAID AUTHO RITY TO PASS AN ORDER AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 3. CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION SUPPORTED BY WAY OF AN AFFIDA VIT THE LD. SR.DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PRAYER FOR REMAND OF THE APPEAL. 4. ACCORDINGLY IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PART IES BEFORE THE BENCH, THE ISSUES IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRE CTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASS ESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTERESTS IS ADVISED TO UTILIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY BY MAKING FULL AND PR OPER COMPLIANCES BEFORE THE SAID AUTHORITY. SAID ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.11.2018. SD/- SD/- ( . .. . & ) ( ! ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) '( #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER + (, #-. /.#/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. $ 0#/ CIT 4. $ 0# ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. .34 #5, & 5, 7894:/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 49 ;%/ GUARD FILE (, $ / BY ORDER, < / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.