Sh. Balwinder Singh, Kharar V. ITO, W-6(4), Mohali

ITA 893/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9913 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARJINDER SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Corroborative evidences; Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC CHANDIGARH , ! BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM ./ ITA NO. 893/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI BALWINDER SINGH, VILLAGE BHAGOMAJRA, PAKKI RURKI, TEH-KHARAR. VS THE ITO, WARD-6(4), MOHALI. ./ PAN NO. : OAMPS4549P / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH / REVENUE BY : SHRI HARJINDER SINGH, ADDL.CIT ! ' # / DATE OF HEARING : 22.05. 2019 $%&' # / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.05.2019 '#/ ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 OF CIT(A)-2 CHANDIGAR H PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, BEFORE REFERRING TO THE SPECIFIC PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF GROUNDS RAISED, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO REQUIRE THE AS SESSEE TO ADDRESS THE DELAY OF 102 DAYS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. 2.1 THE LD. AR MR. TEJ MOHAN SINGH RELYING UPON THE APPLICATION DATED 01.04.2019 SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY HAS OCCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF THE PECULIAR CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AROSE AS THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN DISMISSED FROM SERVICE SOME TIME IN 2006 AND WAS REINSTATED ONLY SOME TIME BACK IN 2018. AS A RESULT OF THIS EVENT, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED RUNNING FROM P ILLAR TO POST AND WORKED EVEN AS AGRICULTURAL LABOURER TO KEEP HIS BODY AND SOUL ALIVE. THESE FACTS AND ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 8 CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS SUBMITTED, HAVE BEEN CONSIDER ED BY THE ITAT IN 2011-12 AND 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEARS WHERE THE DELAY OF 170 DAYS HAS BEEN CONDONED. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES C ONTINUED TO REMAIN THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY, RELYING UPON THE PRECEDENT AVAILABLE I N ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. COPIES OF THE ORDERS DATED 13.03.2019 IN ITA 905/CHD/2018 AND 25.03.2019 IN IT A 906/CHD/2018 WERE FILED AND RELIED UPON. 3. THE LD. SR.DR CONSIDERING ORDERS OF THE ITAT AND THE APPLICATION MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE PECULI AR CIRCUMSTANCES, HE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE DELAY BEING CONDONED. 3.1 FOR READY REFERENCE, THE CONTENTS OF THE APPLIC ATION DATED 01.04.2019 ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER FOR READY REFERENCE : 1. THAT THE ABOVE INCOME TAX APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-2, CHANDIGARH WAS FILED ON 19.06.2018 WHICH WAS LATE BY 102 DAYS. 2. THAT THE APPELLATE ORDER WAS RECEIVED ON 08.01.2018 AND AS SUCH THE APPEAL WAS TO BE FILED BY 09.03.2018. 3. THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN DISMISSED FROM SERVICE I N THE YEAR 2006. THAT HE HAD BEEN RUNNING FROM PILLAR TO POST TO GET HIMSELF REINSTAT ED IN SERVICE AND IT WAS ONLY IN THE YEAR 2018, HE WAS REINSTATED IN SERVICE. COPY OF THE ORD ER OF DISMISSAL AND SUBSEQUENT REINSTATEMENT IS ANNEXED HEREWITH. 4. THAT TO MAKE THE BOTH ENDS MEET SINCE HE DID NOT HA VE ANY SOURCE OF INCOME, HE HAD SHIFTED TO HIS VILLAGE MACCHIWARA DISTT. LUDHIANA T O TILL HIS ANCESTRAL LAND AND WAS PURSUING AGRICULTURE THERE. 5. THAT THE MAIL AND OTHER NOTICES WERE BEING RECEIVED BY HIS OLD AUNT (MOTHERS SISTER) WHO IS ILLITERATE AND AROUND 85 YEARS OF AGE STAYING AL ONE IN VILLAGE BHAGOMAJRA WHO DID NOT INFORM HIM ABOUT THE RECEIPT OF ORDER . 6. IT WAS ONLY ON SIFTING THROUGH FILES AND DOCUMENTS, IT CAME TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THAT THE ORDER OF CIT (A) HAD BEEN SERVED AT HIS RESIDENCE. 7. THAT IMMEDIATELY HE CONTACTED THE UNDERSIGNED AND H ANDED OVER THE DOCUMENTS FOR FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE IT AT. ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 3 OF 8 8. THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN THE RIGHT FRAME OF MIN D HAVING BEEN DISMISSED FROM SERVICE COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT HE WAS NO LONGER RESIDIN G PERMANENTLY AT VILLAGE BHAGOMAJRA, HE WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND TO OTHER IMPORTANT MATTERS. 9. THAT THERE BEING NO MALA FIDE INTENTION OF NOT FILI NG THE APPEAL IN TIME, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE DELAY BE CONDONED. 10. THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEALS FOR THE EARLIER YEARS I.E. ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 AND 2012-13 HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONDONED ON THE SAME REAS ON MENTIONED SUPRA AND HEARD BY THE HON'BLE BENCH VIDE ORDERS DATED 13.03.2019 & 25.03. 2019 (ITA NO. 905 & 906/CHANDI/2018). COPIES OF THE SAME ARE ENCLOSED H EREWITH. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON A READING OF THE ORDERS RELIED UPON, IT IS SEEN FROM THE ORDERS OF THE ITAT IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE THAT DELAY OF 170 DAYS HAS BEEN CONDONED ON SIMILAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. NOTHING HAS BEEN PLACED BE FORE US TO SHOW THAT EITHER THE FACTS WERE INCORRECTLY APPRECIATED OR THERE WAS SOME CONTRARY EVIDENCE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REBUTTAL ON FACTS, I FIND NO GOO D REASON TO VARY FROM THE VIEW TAKEN. ACCORDINGLY, TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT N O UNDUE ADVANTAGE HAS BEEN DERIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING THE APPEAL LATE A ND NO VESTED RIGHT OF THE REVENUE IS UPSET IN CASE THE DELAY IS CONDONED, ACC EPTING THE EXPLANATION OFFERED AS GENUINE AND BONAFIDE ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH FOR REA SONS BEYOND HIS CONTROL, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL ON TIME, DELAY I S CONDONED. THE SPECIFIC REASONING ON FACTS JUSTIFYING THE ABOVE CONCLUSION IS EXTRACTED FROM ITA 906/CHD/2018 HEREUNDER FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS : 2.1 NOTING THE COMMON STAND OF THE PARTIES BEFORE T HE BENCH WHEREIN THE PRAYER OF CONDONATION OF DELAY IS MADE ON IDENTICAL FACTS AS IN ITA 905/CHD/2018 AND THE DEPARTMENTAL OBJECTIONS ALSO REMAIN IDENTICAL, ACCORDINGLY RELYI NG ON THE DETAILED REASONS AS SET OUT IN ITA NO. 905/CHD/2018, THE DELAY HEREIN ALSO FOR SIMILAR REASONS IS CONDONED. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ALSO IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT HE WAS DISMISSED FROM THE SERVICES OF CONSTABLE IN PUNJAB POLICE AND REMAINED JOBLESS AND SHIFTED FROM KHARAR TO MACCHIWARA DISTT. LUDHIANA AND ONLY AFTER BEING REI NSTATED IN APRIL, 2018 HE COULD ATTEND TO THE MAIL AND OTHER NOTICES RECEIVED IN HIS ABSENCE BY HIS WIDOWED MASSI (MOTHERS SISTER) AND HENCE THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL. T HE BONAFIDE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SHOWN TO BE INCORRECT ON FACTS. TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT NO ADVANTAGE HAS BEEN DERIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY THE LATE FILING OF THE P RESENT APPEAL. SIMILARLY NO DISADVANTAGE HAS BEEN VISITED UPON THE REVENUE IN CASE THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND THE ISSUES ARE SETTLED ON MERITS. ACCORDINGLY SATISFIED WITH THE BONAFIDE EXP LANATION OFFERED AS IN ITA NO. ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 4 OF 8 905/CHD/2018 THE DELAY IS CONDONED. FOR READY REFER ENCE, THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM THE AFORESAID ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : 5. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MA TERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FROM S ERVICE. THE LETTER NO. 8/24/2017- 1G5/6G3/735-769 DT. 22/02/2018 RELIED UPON BY THE A SSESSEE TAKES NOTE OF IN PARA 3 DELAY OF ABOUT A YEAR AS A RESULT OF ADDRESS NOT CO RRECTLY NOTICED. THE FACTUM OF INFORMATION RECEIVED AT AN INCORRECT ADDRESS AS A R EASON FOR LACK OF AWARENESS AND CONSEQUENTLY FOR NOT BRINGING ON RECORD THE FACT TH AT HE WAS EXONERATED TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS AND LAW , PUNJAB GOVERNMENT. THE DELAYED INFORMATION OF A YEAR IN BRINGING THIS FACT TO THE NOTICE OF GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB IS EVIDENT FROM PARA 3 OF THE SAME. ON PERUSAL OF T HE PARA 4 OF THE AFORESAID LETTER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FROM SERVICE B Y AN ORDER OF THE COURT IN CASE NO. 69 DT. 04/03/2006 AND HE WAS FINALLY ACQUITTED ON THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT AND HE WAS REAPPOINTED WITH NO BACK WAGES ON THE PRINCIPLE NO WORK NO PAY AND HIS DATE OF RESTORATION AS PER THE LETTER DT. 13/02/2018 IT WAS DIRECTED WOULD BE HELD FROM HIS DATE OF JOINING. FOR READY REFERENCE THE AFORESAID LETTE R IS EXTRACTED HERE UNDER: IN CONTINUATION OF LETTER NO. 8/24/2017-1G5/6G3/735 -769 AND DATED 22.2.2018 GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS AND LAW ( HOME-3 BRANCH) OFFICE ORDER SH. BALWINDER SINGH CONSTABLE HAS PRESENTED IN PERS ON FOR HEARING BALWINDER SINGH HAS TOLD THAT HIS NAME WAS ASSOCIAT ED WITH OTHER ACCUSED AND STOLEN VEHICLE AND FAKE DOCUMENTS WERE RECOVERED FROM THEM , DUE TO THIS RE ASON HE WAS ALSO ARRESTED AND A CASE WAS REGISTERED AT PS SECTOR 26 CHANDIGARH , DUE TO THAT HE WAS DISMISSED FROM THE JOB. HE TOLD THAT AS PER THE ORDER OF HON'BLE COURT HE HAS BEEN ACQUITTED FR OM ALL THE CHARGES, AND HE MAY BE REAPPOINTED ON HIS JOB. 3. APPLICANT HAS ORALLY EXPLAINED HIS PART DURING T HE HEARING. WHEN IT WAS ASKED TO HIM WHY THE APPEAL WAS MADE AFTER ONE YEAR OF DATE OF JUDGM ENT I.E 20.9.2016. IN REPLY OF THAT HE TOLD THAT IN THE ORDER OF HON'BLE COURT HIS ADDRESS WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED, WHICH TAKE 4-5 MONTHS TO RECTIFY THE SAME (18.2.2017). OPERATIVE PART OF THE ORDER PASSE D BY HON'BLE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CHANDIGARH ON DATED 20.3.2017 ARE AS UND ER:- ' AS A TOTALITY OF FOREGOING DISCUSSION AND FINDING , NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT BY THE PROSECUTION ON THE FILE TO BRING THE ACCUSED WITHIN THE AMBIT O F CHARGES. HENCE, WHILE EXTENDING THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT TO THE ACCUSED , HE IS ACQUITTED OF THE CHARG ES FRAMED AGAINST HIM' 4. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONED THAT THE AP PLICANT WAS DISMISSED DUE TO CHARGES IMPOSED AGAINST HIM IN CASE NO. 69 DATED 4.3.2006, AS PER THE ORDER MENTIONED ABOVE APPLICANT IS ACQUITTED , BUT THE HON'BLE COURT HAS NOT ACQUITTE D BALWINDER SINGH, BUT HE HAS BEEN ACQUITTED FROM CHARGES ON THE BASIS OF BENEFIT OF DOUBT' , AS HE H AS BEEN ACQUITTED FROM CHARGES SO TO REAPPOINT HIM ON HIS JOB PRINCIPLE OF NO WORK NO PAY WILL BE APPL ICABLE AS PER THE JUDGMENT GIVEN IN DIFFERENT CASES BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. EX. CONSTABLE BALWIND ER SINGH 82/304 IS PERMITTED TO RESUME HIS SERVICES. NO BENEFIT WILL BE GIVEN FROM THE DATE OF DISMISSAL 16.3.2006 TO DATE OF REJOINING ON THE BA SIS OF PRINCIPLE OF 'NO WORK NO PAY. HIS RESTORATION W ILL BE ASSUMED FROM THE DATE OF JOINING. ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 5 OF 8 DATED, CHANDIGARH DR NIRMALJIT SINGH KALSI , IAS 13.2.2018 ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY , GOVT OF PUNJAB HOME AFFAIRS , DEPTT OF LAW AND JAIL ENDORSEMENT NO 8/24/2017- 1G5/6G3/735/1287 DATED : CHD 23.3.2018 A COPY OF THE SAME IS BEING SENT TO DIRECTOR GENERA L OF POLICE , PUNJAB IN REFERENCE OF THEIR LETTER NO. 12150/E-2(2) DATED 17.7.2017 FOR INFORMATION A ND FURTHER NECESSARY ACTION AND INFORMED THAT APPELLANT MAY KINDLY BE INFORMED ABOUT THE ABO VE MENTIONED ORDERS. SD/- BY SUPERINTENDENT ENDORSEMENT NO. 8/24/2017 1G5/6G3/735/1287 DATED CHANDIGARH A COPY OF THE SAME IS SENT TO EX CONSTABLE BALWINDE R SINGH 304 82 ND BN CHANDIGARH FOR INFORMATION AND FURTHER NECESSARY ACTION. SD/ BY SUPERINTENDENT OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB, CHAND IGARH NO. 4990-91/E-2(2) DATED CHANDIGARH 28.02.2018 (1) A COPY OF THE SAME IS SENT TO ADDITIONAL DGP / ARME D PNJ JALANDHAR CANTT TO INFORM THE EX CONSTABLE BALWINDER SINGH ABOUT THE ABOVE MENTIONED ORDERS AN D ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT OF THE SAME MAY BE SENT TO THIS OFFICE. (2) COMMANDANT 82 ND BN PAP CHANDIGARH OFFICE OF DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL , POLICE PAP -2 AND TRAINING PUNJAB CHANDIGARH NO; 601 /A-3 DATED 4-4-2018 COPY OF THE PREVIOUS PAGE IS BEING SENT TO COMMANDA NT 82 ND BN CHANDIGARH AND INSTRUCTED THAT THAT COPY OF THE ORDERS MAY DELIVER TO EX CONSTABLE BALWINDER SINGH 82/304 AT THEIR OWN LEVEL AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE SAME MAY SEND TO THIS OFFICE. ENCLOSED : COPY OF ORDERS SD/- BY GURMEET SINGH SUPTT FOR DIG, PAP-2 AND TRAINING CENTRE, CHANDIGARH 5.1 IT IS FURTHER SEEN FROM PAPER BOOK PAGE 8 THAT THE ASSESSEE REJOINED THE SERVICE ON 04/04/2018 AT 12 OCLOCK. ACCORDINGLY CONSIDERI NG THE OVERALL FACTUAL MATRIX AS SET OUT HEREIN ABOVE I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE EXPLANAT ION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR FILING THE APPEAL LATE BY 170 DAYS CAN BE ACCEPTED. THE OBJECT ION OF THE LD. SR. DR HAVE BEEN TAKEN NOTE OF WHO HAS STATED THAT IT IS THE DUTY AN D RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN ALERT. AGREEING WITH SAID SUBMISSION AND HO LDING THAT IT IS THE DUTY OF THE PERSON TO STAY ALERT AND ALIVE TO HIS INTERESTS WHI CH INCLUDE FILING OF APPEALS ETC. WITHIN THE STATUTORY TIME LIMITS I FIND THAT IN THE PECULI AR FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE WHERE THE ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 6 OF 8 ASSESSEE IS BATTLING FOR HIS PHYSICAL EXISTENCE AND PERFORCE NEEDED TO SHIFT HIS RESIDENCE IN ORDER TO FIND MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD ENGAGING IN AG RICULTURAL ACTIVITY IN HIS ANCESTRAL VILLAGE, THE LAPSES IN THE PECULIAR FACTS CAN BE WE LL UNDERSTOOD. ACCEPTING THE BONAFIDE EXPLANATION, THE DELAY IS CONDONED. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT NO ADVANTAGE HAS BEEN DERIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING THE APPEAL LATE A ND NO PREJUDICE IS CAUSED TO THE REVENUE AS NO VESTED RIGHT OF THE REVENUE IS UPSET IN CASE THE DELAY IS CONDONED. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT. ACCORDINGLY PART IES WERE DIRECTED TO ARGUE THE APPEAL IN MERITS. 2.2 SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES. ACCORDINGLY, THEY WERE DIRECTED TO ARGUE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. IN VIEW THEREOF, PARTIES WERE DIRECTED TO ARGUE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 6. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED OR DER SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PARTICIPATE FOR THE VERY SAME REASON. IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT EVEN BEFORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE CO ULD NOT BE PROPERLY REPRESENTED. INVITING ATTENTION TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.03.2016 WHICH, THOUGH HAS BEEN PASSED U/S 143(3), ATTENTION WAS IN VITED TO THE DETAILED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE EXTRACTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AT P AGES 2 AND 4. REFERRING TO THE SAME, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE THE AO ALSO, THO UGH THE ASSESSEE WAS REPRESENTED BY A COUNSEL, HOWEVER SINCE RELEVANT FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES COULD NOT BE MADE AVAILABLE TO HIM ON ACCOUNT OF THE PRE- OCCUPATION WITH VITAL AFFAIRS, THE ASSESSEE WILL NEED TO FILE SUPPORTING EVIDENCES WHICH IF FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) COULD BECOME FRESH EVIDENCES. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS H IS PRAYER THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE AO. 7. THE LD. SR.DR CONSIDERING THE RECORD TAKING NOTE OF THE SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS AT PAGE 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, AGR EED THAT THE ISSUES WILL BE NEEDED TO BE LOOKED INTO BY THE AO FIRST. THE SPEC IFIC FACTS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE PARTIES TO MAKE SUCH A PRAYER, ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS : IN RESPONSE TO THE FINAL SHOW CAUSE, SH.ASHISH BAR THWAL C.A. APPEARED ON 17.03.20L'S, FURNISHED POWER OF ATTORNEY, DULY SIGNED BY THE ASS ESSEE AND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR 1-2 DAYS. IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, CASE WAS FIXED FOR 18.3.2016. THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED THE PROCEEDING ON 18.03.2016, 21.3.2016 & 23.3.2016 BUT HE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY EXPLANATION/DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF CASH D EPOSIT IN HDFC BANK. THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 7 OF 8 ONLY FURNISHED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE REGARDING C LAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80-C OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. FROM THE FACTS STATED ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS NO EXPLANATION TO OFFER FOR THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 11,67,600/- IN A CCOUNT NO.08121000026204 MAINTAINED WITH HDFC BANK, KHARAR. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PR OVE THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 11,67,600/- IN HDFC BANK, AN ADDITION OF RS. 11,67, 600/- IS HEREBY MADE TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS FURNISHED INACCURATE/CONCEALED THE PARTICULAR OF INCOME. THEREFORE, PENALTY PROCEEDING S UNDER SECTION 271(L)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARE INITIATED FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICUL ARS OF INCOME . 8. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE IN TERMS OF THE PRAYER OF THE PARTIES WHICH IS FOUND T O BE JUSTIFIED FROM THE RECORD, REMAND BACK TO THE AO IS FULLY SUPPORTED. I FURTHE R FIND THAT INFACT NOT ONLY THE FACTS ON RECORD BUT ALSO THE PRECEDENT AVAILABLE IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN ITA 906/CHD/2018 ORDER DATED 25.03.2019 WHEREIN ON SIMI LAR FACTS AND PRAYER, THE ISSUES WERE REMANDED TO THE AO FULLY SUPPORTS THE J OINT PRAYER MADE. RELEVANT DISCUSSION FROM THE ORDER IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER : 3. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESE NT CASE ALSO, ADMITTEDLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR THE REASON THA T ON THE SPECIFIC DATE OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE BEFORE THE CIT(A). DR AWING A DISTINCTION FROM THE EARLIER APPEAL, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IN ALL FAIRNESS THE ASSES SEE HAS PARTICIPATED BEFORE AO AS THE ASSESSEE'S WIDOWED AUNT DID COMMUNICATE SOME LETTER S AND NOTICES AT TIMES AND THE ASSESSEE HAS PARTICIPATED CONSEQUENTLY BEFORE THE AO WHO PAS SED AN ORDER U/S 143(3). THE SAID ORDER WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND AS A RESULT OF LACK OF COMMUNICATION, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PARTICIPATE BEFORE THE CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THIS FACTUAL POSITION HE REQUESTED FOR A REMAND TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHERE THE AS SESSEE FOR THE REASONS AS ARGUED IN ITA 905/CHD/2018 COULD NOT PARTICIPATE DUE TO LACK OF N OTICE. 4. CONSIDERING THE FACT THE LD. SR. DR HAD NO OBJEC TION TO THE REMAND TO THE LD. CIT(A). 5. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE A SSESSEE REMAINED UN-REPRESENTED FOR REASONS BEYOND ITS CONTROL NAMELY SHIFTING TO HIS ANCESTRAL VILLAGE FOR EEKING OUT A LIVING AND NOTICE ETC. SENT TO HIM AT HIS ADDRESS WHERE HE RESIDED WITH HI S WIDOWED AUNT REMAINING UNATTENDED TO. THUS, CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES BEFORE THE BENCH AS WELL AS IN THE INTE RESTS OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) WITH DIR ECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WHILE SO DIRECTING IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ABUSE O F THE TRUST REPOSED, THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL A VAILABLE ON RECORD. ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTERESTS SHOULD PARTICIPATE FULLY AND F AIRLY IN THE PROCEEDING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. ITA 893/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 8 OF 8 8.1. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES REMAINING IDENTICAL, THE ISSUE IS REMANDED BACK TO THE AO WIT H DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSES SEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN INTEREST IS A DVISED TO ENSURE FULL AND PROPER PARTICIPATION AS IN THE EVENTUALITY OF ABUSE OF THE TRUST REPOSED, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE AO SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.05.2019. SD/- ( ) (DIVA SINGH) ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER % & %( )* +* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. ! , / CIT 4. ! , ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. *-. / , # / , 012.3 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. .2 4' / GUARD FILE %( ! / BY ORDER, 5 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR