Jeevan Singh Chundawat, UDAIPUR V. ITO, UDAIPUR

ITA 413/JODH/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 62044 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R KOKANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 413/JU/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2004-05 JEEVAN SINGH CHUNDAWAT, VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NAVAL SINGH JI KA GUDA, WARD 1(1), UDAIPUR. POST KURABAD, TEHSIL GIRVA, UDAIPUR (PAN: AEWPC 6034J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.R. KOKANI, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 02.07.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), UDAIPUR DATED 23.03.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04-05. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TIME AND THEREAFTER ON OTHER OCCASIONS, NOBODY ATTENDED THE APPEAL PROC EEDINGS BEFORE HIM. THE LD. CIT(A), ACCORDINGLY, FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DO ES NOT WANT THAT THE APPEAL BE DECIDED AND ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE WAS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 413/JU/2010 2 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTIFYING THE DATE OF HEARING THROUGH REGISTERED POST, WHICH DID NOT RETU RN TO THE OFFICE. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DEEMED TO BE SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. EARLIER ALSO, THE ASSESSEE WAS SEEKING ADJOURNMENTS ON VARIOUS DATES. THEREFOR E, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEA L. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THA T THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LD. CIT(A). SEC TION 250(6) OF THE IT ACT REQUIRES THE LD. CIT(A) TO PASS REASONED ORDER. THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL HAVE TO MENTION THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION AND REASONS FO R DECISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER. HOWEVER, THE IMPUGNED ORDER SHOWS THAT THE L D. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR PERSISTENTLY SEEKING ADJ OURNMENTS IN THE MATTER. THEREFORE, THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT T HE LEVEL OF THE LD. CIT(A). EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE MAY SEEK ADJOURNMENT AND THE L D. CIT(A) IS NOT INCLINED TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT, HE HAS TO PASS THE ORDER ON M ERITS GIVING REASONS FOR DECISION IN THE APPELLATE ORDER. WE, ACCORDINGLY, S ET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO HI S FILE WITH THE DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS GIVI NG REASONS FOR DECISION IN ITA NO. 413/JU/2010 3 THE APPELLATE ORDER BY GIVING REASONABLE AND SUFFIC IENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.07.2012. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, JODHPUR 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY