TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 522
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd no. 6, 7 and 8 first which read as under:- "6. The requests before CIT(A) for additional evidence as the assessment by ITO is ex parte has not been considered by the CIT(A). 7. On 16th August there was a huge traffic jam near ITO Crossing due to a really and CA could not reach the CIT(A) office to present the case in appeal. Ramdev was arrested in Delhi on 13th Aug.,2012. It is not that the appellant is not interested or careful about this appeal the hearing fixed by CIT (A) for 16/08/2012 could not be attended on that date. The CA met CIT (A)- Mr Tuteja next day thereof (on 17th morning), but was declined any opportunity of hearing. An affidavit on oath from CA is enclosed to this effect. 8. The order of CIT(A) is without apprising t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of Rs. 42,768/- related to commission expenses to the income of the assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) which was also dismissed by passing impugned order on 3.9.2012. It is pertinent to note that the assessment proceedings as well as proceedings before the first appellate authority i.e. CIT(A) were completed ex parte in the absence of assessee and his representative. Now, the empty handed assessee is before this Tribunal in this appeal. Ground No. 6, 7 & 8 3. Apropos the above grounds, the ld. AR submitted that the AO completed assessment ex parte u/s 144 of the Act, therefore, the assessee submitted additional evidence before the CIT(A) under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules 1962. The AR further cont....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of the CIT(A) should be well-reasoned and speaking one. The AR further contended that when the impugned order is a subject for consideration by statutory authorities at a higher level, it must be cogent and well-reasoned on all issues which have been raised before the quasi-judicial or judicial authority by the appellant/applicant. 5. Replying to the above, ld. DR submitted that when the assessee is not cooperating during the proceedings, then the revenue authorities have no option but to complete the proceedings u/s 144 of the Act ex parte. The DR further contended that neither the assessee nor his representative attended the proceedings before the revenue authorities despite due service of notice and knowledge of date of hearing fixed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....table but since no details have been submitted to the AO as a result he was constrained to pass the best judgment order under section 144." 7. In view of above and considering the facts mentioned in the unrebutted affidavit of Mr. Subhash C. Singhal, the CA and representative of the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that there was a sufficient cause which prevented the assessee's representative from giving his appearance before the CIT(A) on 16.8.2012 and the reason was obviously beyond the control of the assessee and his representative. We further observe that the CIT(A) passed impugned order on 3.9.2012 without affording due opportunity of hearing for the assessee and without considering explanation and additional evidence furni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsidering submissions of the assessee before us, we find it just and proper to set aside the order of CIT(A) as well as ex parte assessment order passed by the AO concerned. As we have noted that the assessee also filed additional evidence before CIT(A) which was not considered while passing impugned order, then we also find it just and proper to restore the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law and provisions of the Act after allowing sufficient opportunity of being heard for the assessee. Needless to say that during the proceedings before the AO, the AO shall provide due opportunity of hearing for the assessee and the assessee shall cooperate during the reassessment proceedings vigilantly and the AO shall pass an ....