ITA NO.655/BANG/2020 SMT. LEELAVATHY NGARAJ, BANGALORE IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CBENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.655/BANG/2020 ASSESSMENTYEAR: 2012 13 SMT. LEELAVATHY NAGARAJ NO.64/2, GURUMURTHAPPA GARDEN SARAKKI MAIN ROAD, J.P. NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 PAN NO : ABPPN4992C VS. ITO WARD-7(2)(3) BANGALORE APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAVI KIRAN, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. R. PREMI, D.R. DATE OF H EARING : 01.12.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.12.2020 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 1.8.2019 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-4, BENGALURU AND IT R ELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. IN AN EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY HIM. 2. THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 132 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION REQUESTING THE BENCH TO CO NDONE THE DELAY. HAVING REGARD TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE THEREIN, WE C ONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. ITA NO.655/BANG/2020 SMT. LEELAVATHY NGARAJ, BANGALORE PAGE 2 OF 3 3. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN O LD LADY AND DID NOT HAVE ANYONE TO PROPERLY ADVICE HER. HENCE, SHE COULD NOT PROPERLY REPRESENT HER CASE BEFORE THE TAX AUTHORIT IES DUE TO LACK OF PROPER ADVICE. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O . HAS PASSED THE ORDER TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGEMENT U/S 144 OF THE I NCOME-TAX ACT,1961 ['THE ACT' FOR SHORT] AND THE LD. CIT(A) H AS ALSO PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE AS SESSEE MAY BE PROVIDED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROPERLY REPRESENT HER CASE, SINCE SHE HAS ENGAGED THE PRESENT COUNSEL ONLY RECENTLY. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERATE BEFORE THE TAX AUTHORITIES AND HENCE, BOTH THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAVE PASSED ORDERS EX-PARTE. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE R ECORD. ADMITTEDLY, ASSESSEE DID NOT REPRESENT BEFORE THE A .O. AS WELL AS BEFORE LD. CIT(A). CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE PROVIDED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRE SENT HER CASE PROPERLY BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IN FACT, AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT FACTS WOULD PROMOTE THE CAU SE OF JUSTICE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT REPRESENT BEFOR E BOTH TAX AUTHORITIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE S HOULD BE IMPOSED A COST. ACCORDINGLY, WE IMPOSE A COST OF RS.2,000/ - (RS. TWO THOUSAND ONLY) UPON THE ASSESSEE, WHICH SHALL BE PA ID TO THE CREDIT OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM TH E DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE PRESENT ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 6. SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF THE ABOVE SAID COST, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE ALL THE ISSU ES TO HIS FILE FOR ITA NO.655/BANG/2020 SMT. LEELAVATHY NGARAJ, BANGALORE PAGE 3 OF 3 EXAMINING THEM AFRESH, AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DIRECT THE AS SESSEE TO PROPERLY COOPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(A) FOR EXPEDITIOUS DISPO SAL OF THE APPEAL. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST DEC, 2020 SD/- (BEENA PILLAI) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED 1 ST DEC, 2020. VG/SPS COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.