Shri Sadan Biyani, Sikar V. ITO Ward-1, Sikar, Ward-1, Sikar

ITA 974/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7215 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANCHAL MEENA CIT DHK
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES SMC, 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 VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 974/JP/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 SADAN BIYANI, J-16, M/S MGB & CO. LLP, LAL KOTHI YOJANA, SAHAKAR MARG, JAIPUR. C UKE VS. I.T.O. WARD-1, SIKAR. PAN NO.: AAUPB 2437 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : MS. CHANCHAL MEENA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING: 03/09/2020 MN?KKS 'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/09/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/05/2019 OF LD. CIT(A)-3, JAIPUR ARISING FROM THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONCLUDED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE IN VIEW OF THE PREVAILING SITUATION OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC. ITA 974/JP/2019_ SADAN BIYANI VS ITO 2 3. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS APPEAL IS CALLED FOR HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE DESPITE THE NOTICES AND INTIMATION FOR HEARING WAS DULY SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT, HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), NOBODY HAS ATTENDED THE HEARING AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED EX PARTE BY THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE PROPOSE TO HEAR AND DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD DR, WHO HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) DESPITE VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED EX PARTE ORDER. SHE HAS OBJECTED TO GRANT OF ANY MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES FOR APPEARING AND FURNISHING EXPLANATION AGAINST THE LEVY OF PENALTY AND DUE TO NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR WANT OF ANY EXPLANATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 4 IS AS UNDER: ITA 974/JP/2019_ SADAN BIYANI VS ITO 3 4. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THE PENALTY ORDER. AS ALREADY DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION FOR SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL NOR ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCES WERE PRODUCED BY HIM DESPITE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY HAVING BEEN PROVIDED. IN THIS CONNECTION, RELIANCE MAY BE PLACED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF H.M. ESUFALI H.M. ABDULALI (1973) 90 ITR 271 WHEREIN THE HONBLE COURT HAS HELD THAT THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY CANNOT SUBSTITUTE ITS OWN JUDGMENT IN PLACE OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE A.O. UNLESS IT IS SHOWN THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE A.O. WAS BIASED, IRRATIONAL, VINDICTIVE OR CAPRICIOUS. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE APPELLANT HAS NOT ABLE TO SHOW THAT THE DECISION OF THE A.O. WAS ARBITRARY, BIASED, IRRATIONAL, VINDICTIVE OR CAPRICIOUS WITHOUT ANY BASIS, I FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF THE A.O. THUS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY WITHOUT EVEN CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. AGAINST WHICH PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN LEVIED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE GRANT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE MATTER AFRESH AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER ITA 974/JP/2019_ SADAN BIYANI VS ITO 4 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 04/09/2020 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SADAN BIYANI, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-1, SIKAR. 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. 974/JP/2019) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR