TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee has not received the impugned order and came to know about the same only when the order passed /s 271(1)(c) dated 12.03.2020 was served upon the assessee at the new address through the process server of the Department. There is no dispute about the fact that because of the failure on the part of the assessee to intimate the new address to the CIT(A) the notices issued by the CIT(A) as well as impugned order could not be received by the assessee. We find that explanation of non receipt of the impugned order by the assessee is factually correct however, the reason for such non receipt of the impugned order is the failure on the part of the assessee to give the fresh address to the ld. CIT(A). Therefore,when the ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Chanchal Meena (ACIT) ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.01.2019 of ld. CIT(A), Jaipur for the assessment order 2010-11. Due to prevailing COVID-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeal is concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 349 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the assessee. 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well as the ld. DR on condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. The ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) after the case was transferred from the ld. CIT(A)-II, Jaipur to ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee prior to the date when the penalty order U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act received by the assessee. He has further pointed out that the penalty order U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was also passed by the AO ex-part and the service of the said order dated 12.03.2020 was affected through departmental process server. Once, change of address was duly intimated to the AO then it was the duty of the AO to communicate the same to the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR has pleaded that when the assessee has explained a reasonable and bonafide cause for delay in filing the appeal then the same may be condoned so as to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following order as under:- I. Vijay Vishan Meghani ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red as bonafide mistake as the assessee did not even bothered about the pendency of its appeal before the ld. CIT(A) or to verify the status of the appeal filed by the assessee for a long time and only when the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was served upon the assessee, the assessee has taken these steps for filing the appeal. Therefore, these explanation of the assessee are nothing but gross negligence on the part of the assessee not to pursue or even bothered about the appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A). She has opposed to the condonation of delay. 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 25.01.2018 subsequently, the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 12.03.2020 was served upon the assessee at the new address through the process server of the Department. There is no dispute about the fact that because of the failure on the part of the assessee to intimate the new address to the ld. CIT(A) the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) as well as impugned order could not be received by the assessee. Thus, we find that explanation of non receipt of the impugned order by the assessee is factually correct however, the reason for such non receipt of the impugned order is the failure on the part of the assessee to give the fresh address to the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in these facts and circumstances of the case when the ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3049/- for commission payment for availing CCM facility. 5. Under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 44,93,115/- on account of speculation and F O losses set off against the business income. 7. We have heard the ld. AR as well as ld. DR and considered the relevant material on record. The appeal of the assessee was decided by the ld. CIT(A) by impugned ex-parte order. The facts and circumstances under which the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by ex-parte order has been discussed by us while deciding the application for condonation of delay in foregoing in para of this order. When ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
