SHRI RAVI SHANKAR, DHOLPURA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, BHARATPUR

ITA 897/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4357 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANCHAL MEENA CIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK KR GUPTA; S L JAIN ADVS
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES A, JAIPUR JH LANHI XLKA ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 897/JP/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 SHRI RAVI SHANKAR, WINE CONTRACTOR, GRAM JAGMOHAN KA PURA, POST-SILAVAT, RAJAKHEDA, DHOLPURA. C UKE VS. I.T.O., WARD-4, BHARATPUR. PAN NO.: ASHPR 7458 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHOK KR. GUPTA & SHRI S.L. JAIN (ADVS.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : MS. CHANCHAL MEENA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/10/2020 MN?KKS 'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/10/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 28/11/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15. 2. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONCLUDED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE IN VIEW OF THE PREVAILING SITUATION OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC. 3. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL EX PARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS ITA 897/JP/2019_ SHRI RAVI SHANKAR VS ITO 2 REGARD, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS WERE RAISED BEFORE THE LD. CITA(A) AND HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY WHILE PASSING THE EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING APPROPRIATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE RECORD OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS ABOUT THE PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL, THEREFORE, IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX PARTE. SHE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE NOTE THAT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX PARTE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY AS UNDER: 3.1 IN THIS CASE, NOTICES U/S 250 WAS ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FIXING THE HEARING ON 26-04-2018, 17-07-2018, 21-08-2018 AND 19-09-2018. NO ONE ATTENDED. OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IS CENTRAL TO ANY ADJUDICATION PROCESS BUT THAT DOES NOT ABSOLVE THE ITA 897/JP/2019_ SHRI RAVI SHANKAR VS ITO 3 APPELLANT FROM NON ATTENDANCE AND SUBMISSION OF EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF GROUND OF APPEAL DESPITE REPEATED AND SEVERAL NOTICES SENT AND SERVED AND NOT RESPONDED. AN ADJUDICATION PROCEEDING CANNOT BE HELD IN ABEYANCE INDEFINITELY ON ACCOUNT OF NON ATTENDANCE OF THE APPELLANT OR HIS AR. IN THIS CASE THE CONTINUED NON RESPONSIVE ATTITUDE OF THE APPELLANT HAS LEFT NO OPTION BEFORE ME BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCES ON RECORD. 3.2 I HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS OF THE CASE FILED ALONG WITH FORM NO. 35. 3.3 IN ABSENCE OF ANY SUBMISSIONS BY THE APPELLANT IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIMS, I HAVE RELIED UPON THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, I DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HENCE, THE GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAD PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORDER AS NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. CIT(A). ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER, WE ALSO NOTICED THAT INITIALLY THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING AND WAS ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS, BUT NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAILS OF HEARING AND THE REASONS FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FULLY EXPLAINED IN PARA NO. 3 OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). WE NOTICED THAT THROUGHOUT THE ASSESSEE REMAINED NON-COOPERATIVE DESPITE AVAILING SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES, THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THEREBY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION, THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. ITA 897/JP/2019_ SHRI RAVI SHANKAR VS ITO 4 6. IN OUR VIEW, IT WAS THE BOUNDED DUTY OF THE PARTIES I.E. ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). SINCE, THIS WAS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THEREFORE IT WAS ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT FOR THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ACTED WITH DUE DILIGENCE. NEVERTHELESS, THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE DEMANDS THAT THE LIS BETWEEN THE PARTIES SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTIES. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE RECORD OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(A) IN DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS AND WITHOUT ANY SUFFICIENT REASON, NOT TO TAKE FURTHER ADJOURNMENTS. IF THE ASSESSEE TAKES ADJOURNMENT WITHOUT ANY SUFFICIENT AND PLAUSIBLE REASON, THEN THE LD. CIT(A) IS AT LIBERTY TO PASS ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 7. BEFORE PARTING, WE MAY MAKE IT CLEAR THAT OUR DECISION TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) SHALL IN NO WAY BE CONSTRUED AS HAVING ANY REFLECTION OR EXPRESSION ON THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE, WHICH SHALL BE ADJUDICATED BY LD. CIT(A) INDEPENDENTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ITA 897/JP/2019_ SHRI RAVI SHANKAR VS ITO 5 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST OCTOBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO LANHI XLKA (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 21/10/2020 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI RAVI SHANKAR, DHOLPURA. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O., WARD-4, BHARATPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 897/JP/2019) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR