IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 898/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 SHRI BALJIT SINGH, VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -VI(I), PROP. RYAIT ENTERPRISES, LUDHIANA. 197-198F, BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR, PAKHOWAL ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN : AAZPR4972K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.S.NAGAR DATE OF HEARING : 09.09.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.09.2014 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUD HIANA DATED 23.08.2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAI NST THE PENALTY PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL : 1. THAT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 250(6) BY THE L D. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II LUDHIANA IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL E X-PARTE. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS A GAINST THE EX- PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) IN NOT DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERITS. 2 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED UPON THE ASSESSEE A T RS. 319,923/- AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WHO IN TURN VI DE ORDER DATED 23.08.2012 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IN-LIMINE BY RELYING UPON THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN CIT VS MULTIPLA N INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKAJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE ON MERITS AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 5. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS A GAINST THE PASSING OF AN EX-PARTE ORDER BY THE LD. CIT(A) DUE TO THE NON ATTENDANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE VARIOUS DATES OF HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AG AINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIR ES REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSE E BEFORE PASSING AN ORDER. WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPE AKING ORDER IN THE CASE. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, THE CIT(A) HAS TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN RES PECT OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER HEAR ING THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT CIT(A) IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS FAILED TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS AS LAID DOWN IN SEC TION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEE M IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO DEC IDE THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE SPEAKING ORDER AFTER A LLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE APPOINT ED DATE/S OF 3 HEARING AND PRESENT HIS CASE. THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH SEPTEMBER,2014. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 15 TH SEPTEMBER,2014 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/ITAT/CHD