Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Shri Vinod Kumar 31 A Govind Vatika, ... vs Income Tax Officer Ward-7(3) Jaipur, ... on 24 September, 2019
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; ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 86/JP/2017
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2010-11
Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, cuke I.T.O.,
31-A, Govind Vatika, Laxman Vs. Ward-7(3),
Doongri, Jaipur. Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ARKPS 5962 N
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 281/JP/2019
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2010-11
Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, cuke I.T.O.,
31-A, Govind Vatika, Laxman Vs. Ward-7(3),
Doongri, Jaipur. Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ARKPS 5962 N
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT)
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 23/09/2019
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 24/09/2019
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 07/10/2016 and 31/12/2018 respectively of ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi, Camp office at Jaipur and the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur 2 ITA 86/JP/2017 & 281/JP/2019 Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs ITO arising from the assessment order passed U/s 143(3) and order passed by the A.O. U/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the A.Y. 2010-11.
2. At the time of hearing, the AR of the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee ex parte and therefore, the appeals of the assessee were not decided on merits. Hence, the ld AR has pleaded that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity of hearing before the ld. CIT(A) and the matter may be set aside to the record of the ld. CIT(A).
3. On the other hand, the ld DR has vehemently opposed the prayer of the assessee and submitted that the several opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A) in both the appeals, however, when none has appeared on behalf of the assessee then the appeals were dismissed ex parte.
4. I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. These two appeals are arising from the assessment orders and thereafter the A.O. passed an order U/s 154 of the Act thereby making additions on account of short-term capital gain. Both the appeals were decided by two separate ld. CIT(A) but ex parte. Since the appeals of the assessee are not decided on merits by a speaking order but were dismissed summarily for want of any appearance and explanation on 3 ITA 86/JP/2017 & 281/JP/2019 Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs ITO behalf of the assessee, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, these two matters are set aside to the record of the ld. CIT(A) for granting one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case. Since both the appeals are relating to one assessment order and therefore, both should be heard and decided being clubbed matter.
5. In the result, both these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th September, 2019 Sd/-
¼fot; iky jko½ (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 24th September, 2019 *Ranjan vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Jaipur.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward-7(3), Jaipur.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@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. 86/JP/2017 & 281/JP/2019) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar