RAMESHWAR PRASAD SAINI,KOTPUTLI V. ITO WD BEHROR, BEHROR

MA 14/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Rameshwar Prasad Saini, who filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act against an earlier order of the ITAT, Jaipur. The original appeal was dismissed ex parte due to the non-appearance of the assessee and his representative, despite multiple opportunities given. The assessee, a government-employed teacher, could not attend due to professional obligations, and his representative was delayed due to another engagement. The ITAT, considering the circumstances and the principles of natural justice, recalled the earlier order and allowed the assessee to present his case on merits, albeit with a cost for previous non-compliance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 786070 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: VEDANT AGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

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 Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI M.A. No. 14/JP/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 481/JP/2024) fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 Shri Rameshwar Prasad Saini S/o Shri Babu Lal Saini, Behind Janana Hospital, Paota, Kotputli cuke Vs. The ITO, Ward-Behror Behror LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ASGPS2563Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Vedant Agarwal, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 09/10/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, A.M. The Present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee u/s 254(2) of the Act against the order of ITAT, Jaipur Benches, Jaipur in ITA No. 481/JP/2024 dated 10.07.2024 praying therein following reasons to suitably modify or recall of its order: Miscellaneous Application in Appeal No. 481/JP/2024 in the case of Shri Rameshwar Prasad Saini, PAN ASGPS2563Q, A.Y. 2011-12, date of order 10/07/2024. Respected Sir, Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 2 The aforementioned appeal was scheduled for hearing on 26/06/2024. Unfortunately, neither the Appellant, Shri Rameshwar Prasad Saini, nor his authorized representative could appear before the Hon'ble Bench on the said date. The absence was not intentional but was caused by unavoidable circumstances. The Appellant, being a government-employed teacher, was unable to attend the hearing due to professional obligations. Despite his efforts, he could not make himself available on the assigned date. Additionally, the Appellant had requested his authorized representative to attend the hearing. However, due to an unforeseen delay caused by the representative's prior engagement in another matter listed before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, he was unable to reach the courtroom on time. Consequently, the Hon'ble Bench decided the appeal ex parte. The Appellant was prevented by reasonable and genuine cause from attending the hearing and is deeply interested in pursuing the appeal. In view of the above, it is respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble Bench may kindly accept this application and restore the appeal for hearing in the interest of natural justice. Your kind consideration will be greatly appreciated. 2. In support of the contention raised in the Miscellaneous Application the assessee also filed an affidavit duly sworn before the Notary Public the contents of the affidavit read as under:- Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 3 Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 4 3. On the other hand, ld. DR objected to the Miscellaneous Application so filed by the assessee and stated that in the grab of the present MA is trying to review the order of the ITAT. The assessee is trying to get review the order already passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of the assessee vide order dated 10.07.2024 and therefore, the ld. DR supported the order of Co- ordinate Bench. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. As is evident from the order of Co-ordinate Bench passed on 10.07.2024 wherein the bench has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-appearance of his authorized representative. The bench also noted that the assessee was given five times opportunity, but the ld. AR of the assessee did not appear. Considering request of the assessee vide an affidavit dated 28.01.2025, the assessee prayed that he always respects to the authorities and he cannot be punished at the cost of his counsel and he may be given an opportunity of being heard. Considering that specific request of the assessee, we recalled the order as the lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 5 that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. Having recalled the order now we deal with the appeal of the assessee wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in dismissed the appeal of assessee without considering the facts of the case and without giving the proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. A.O. grossly erred in initiating reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. A.O. grossly erred in finalizing the reassessment proceedings without issuing and serving notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. A.O. grossly erred in not providing the copy of reasons recorded to the assessee. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. Lower authorities grossly erred in making and confirming the addition of Rs 15,62,000/-on account of cash deposits in bank account. 6. That the appellant craves his indulgence to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the ground of appeal at any time before decision of appeal. 6. As is evident from the above grounds of appeal so raised by the assessee and considering the order of ld. CIT(A) i.e. the Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 6 appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) thereby the assessee could not appear even though there were five opportunities granted to the assessee and the learned AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee be given one chance to represent his case on the merits of the dispute. Be that it may as we have noted that the lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down. 7. Having noted that at the mistake of the counsel the assessee should not suffer and thereby after considering the rival submission and arguments we deem it fit to remand back to the matter so as to decide the merits of the dispute to the file of ld. CIT(A) who shall decide the matter in accordance with law after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. But considering the non-compliance made by the assessee before this tribunal and that of ld. CIT(A), the assessee is burdened with cost of Rs. 2,000/- to be deposited in Prime Minister Relief Fund and the assessee shall submit that receipt of the cost deposited by him when made appearance before the ld. CIT(A) in pursuance of this order. Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 14/JP/2025 Rameshwar Prasad Saini 7 In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed and that of the ITA no. 481/JP/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30/10/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh ½ ¼ jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 30/10/2025 *Ganesh Kumar, PS vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Rameshwar Prasad Saini, Kotputli 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-Behror, Behror 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 {MA No. 14/JP/2025} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "