SHRI ABDUL RASHEED QURESHI, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-1, Jaipur

ITA 947/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9633 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENC HES A JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRA M SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 947/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 SHRI ABDUL RASHEED QURESHI M/S AL SAMEER & CO. 292, NEAR BARKATI MASJID, NEAR VYAS COLONY, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. ITO, WARD-4(1), NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILD, STATUTE CIRCLE, C- SCHEME JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAFPQ6310E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : MS. CHANCHAL MEENA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/07/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08/07/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-2, JAIPUR DATED 25.03.2019 CONFIRMING THE TRADING ADDI TION OF RS 4,05,783/- AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THE HEARING OF THE MATTER WAS SCHEDULED FOR TODA Y THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING IN VIEW OF THE ONGOING COVID-19 PANDEM IC SITUATION IN THE COUNTRY. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE REGISTR Y THROUGH EMAIL FROM SHRI HANIF KHAN, C.A. AND AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF T HE ASSESSEE STATING THAT DUE TO SOME UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS NOT PO SSIBLE TO APPEAR TODAY AND THE MATTER MAY BE ADJOURNED. ITA NO. 947/JP/2019 SHRI ABDUL RASHEED QURESHI, JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 2 3. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS DRAWN OUR REFERENCE TO THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT AMPLE OPPORTUNITY HAS BEE N PROVIDED BY THE LD CIT(A), HOWEVER, EVERY TIME, THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING, ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE AND EFFECTIVELY, THERE IS NO COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICES BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) A ND THE MATTER HAS ACCORDINGLY BEEN DECIDED BY THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE MATTER HAS BEEN LISTED IN THE PAST, HOWEVER, THE AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE HAS SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT FROM TIME TO TIME AND EVEN TODAY , WHEN THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING, REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE FOR ADJOU RNING THE MATTER. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT MORE THAN ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE TRIBUNAL, NO USE FUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN PROVIDING FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE. ON MERITS, THE LD DR SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PURSUED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIO N, NO SPECIFIC REASON HAS BEEN SPECIFIED WHICH HAS PREVENTED THE AUTHORIZED R EPRESENTATIVE FROM APPEARANCE BEFORE THE BENCH. GIVEN THAT THE MATTER HAS BEEN LISTED FOR HEARING ON EARLIER OCCASIONS AND THEN, ADJOURNED FR OM TIME TO TIME, WE FIND THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN GRANTING FURTHER ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER AND THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION IS HEREBY RE JECTED. 5. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED TH E IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.12.2017 WHEREBY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REJE CTED AND TRADING ADDITION OF RS 4,05,783/- HAS BEEN MADE WHICH HAS B EEN CONFIRMED BY THE LD CIT(A). FURTHER, WE FIND THAT THE MATTER HAS BEEN LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) ON COUPLE OF OCCASIONS AND HAS BEEN A DJOURNED BY THE LD CIT(A) ON EACH OF SUCH OCCASIONS AT THE REQUEST OF THE AUT HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE LAST OCCASION, THERE IS NON-COMPLIANCE AS WE LL AND THEREFORE, THE ITA NO. 947/JP/2019 SHRI ABDUL RASHEED QURESHI, JAIPUR VS. ITO, JAIPUR 3 MATTER HAS BEEN DECIDED EX-PARTE BY THE LD CIT(A). HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY AND GIVEN THAT THE MATTER HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS, WE BELIEVE THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVES ONE M ORE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT HIS CASE AND TO PUT FORTH HIS ARGUMENTS A ND CONTENTIONS AS SO ADVISED. THE MATTER IS ACCORDINGLY SET-ASIDE TO T HE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) WHO SHALL DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/07/2020. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 08/07/2020 * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SH. ABDUL RASHEED QURESHI, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD-4(1), NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILD, STATUTE CIRCLE, C- SCHEME, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 947/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR