, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, B, CHANDIGARH . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 82/CHD/2019 ! ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH SIDHU, H.N. 1538, SECTOR 34-D CHANDIGARH #$ THE ITO, WARD 4(3), CHANDIGARH % & ./PAN NO: ACTPS3686H %'/ APPELLANT )*%' /RESPONDENT HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING +, - . /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.R. SHARMA, CA - . / REVENUE BY : SHRI DAYA INDER SINGH SIDHU, ADD L. CIT / 0 - ,1& /DATE OF HEARING : 05.08.2020 23'! - ,1& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 .08.2020 / ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.8.2018 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] . 2. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 76 DAYS. A SEPARAT E APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF D ELAY, WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF THE AP PLICANT HAD DIED ITA NO. 82-CHD-201 9 SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH SIDHU, CHANDIGARH 2 ON 4.2.2018. THE APPLICANT HAD TO LEFT INDIA ON 6.2 .2018 AND THEREAFTER THE APPLICANT CAME BACK TO INDIA ON 31.3 .2018 BUT AGAIN LEFT FOR ENGLAND ON 15.8.2018. THEREAFTER, HE CAME BACK TO INDIA IN THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 2018. THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE OF HEARING FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A). T HAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED THE LD. CIT(A) EX-PARTE OF T HE APPLICANT ON 21.8.2018 AND THAT DURING THAT PERIOD THE APPLICAN T WAS NOT PRESENT IN INDIA. THAT EVEN THE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE APPLICANT. IT WAS ONLY DURING THE ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER INFORMED THAT APPEAL OF THE APPLICANT HAD BEEN DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A). THEREAFTER, THE APPLICANT PROCURED THE COPY OF THE ORDER AND FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS SUPPORTED WITH THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE APPLICANT ASSESSEE. 3. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, WHICH ARE FU RTHER CORROBORATED WITH THE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE A PPLICANT, IT IS PROVED ON FILE THAT THE APPLICANT WAS NOT PRESENT I N INDIA AT THE TIME OF THE PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND FURTHER TH AT THE COPY OF THE ORDER WAS NOT SERVED UPON THE APPLICANT IN TIME. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE DELAY IN F ILING THE APPEAL IS HEREBY CONDONED. FOR IDENTICAL REASONS, THE EX-P ARTE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ALSO SET ASIDE. AT THIS STAGE, THE LD . COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANTASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THE ORDE R OF THE ASSESSING ITA NO. 82-CHD-201 9 SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH SIDHU, CHANDIGARH 3 OFFICER IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER. THE APPLICANT COULD N OT PRESENT HIMSELF DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DUE TO THE COMPEL LING CIRCUMSTANCES. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THAT F OR THE SAKE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ASSESSMENT AFRESH. 5. THE LD. DR COULD NOT REBUT THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE IMPU GNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO T HE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ASSESSMENT AFRESH. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 05.08.2020 SD/- SD/- ( . . / N.K. SAINI) ( ! ' / SANJAY GARG) #$% / VICE PRESIDENT &' / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 05.08.2020 .. 4-),5676', / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. %' / THE APPELLANT 2. )*%' / THE RESPONDENT 3. / 8, / CIT 4. / 8, ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 69),: , 1: ! , ;<=> / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. =?0 / GUARD FILE 4 / / BY ORDER, @ / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA NO. 82-CHD-201 9 SHRI PARAMJIT SINGH SIDHU, CHANDIGARH 4