ITA No. 335 of 2013 -1- IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 335 of 2013 Date of Decision: 18.9.2014 Sukhjit Singh ....Appellant. Versus CIT, Aayakar Bhawan, Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH. PRESENT: Ms. Prerna Goswamy, Advocate for Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate for appellant. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by assessee under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Act ) against order dated 23.5.2013 (Annexure A-5) passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal ), for assessment year 2005-06, claiming substantial questions of law as mentioned in para 11 of appeal. 2. few facts necessary for adjudication of present appeal as narrated therein are that appellant who is individual filed his return of income on 5.8.2005 for assessment year 2005-06 declaring income at ` 1,03,500/- and agricultural income at ` 3,75,00/-. said return was processed under Section 144 of Act. assessment 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-07-2020 14:01:32 ::: ITA No. 335 of 2013 -2- was completed by Assessing Officer vide order dated 31.12.2007 (Annexure A-1) by making addition of ` 17,19,000/- on account of cash deposit in Citi Bank, Chandigarh. Feeling aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short CIT(A) ]. CIT(A) vide order dated 13.3.2009 (Annexure A- 2) dismissed appeal. Being dissatisfied with order of CIT(A), assessee filed appeal before Tribunal. Tribunal vide order dated 23.7.2009 (Annexure A-3) allowed appeal and deleted addition made by Assessing Officer and affirmed by CIT(A). revenue challenged order dated 23.7.2009 (Annexure A-3) before this Court by way of ITA No. 626 of 2010. This Court vide order dated 16.2.2011 (Annexure A-4) allowed appeal and set aside impugned order and remitted matter to Tribunal to proceed afresh in accordance with law. As per order of Tribunal, written submissions on behalf of assessee were filed on 27.8.2012 and matter thereafter was adjourned to 28.8.2012 and then to 6.11.2012. However, Tribunal on 20.5.2013 heard case exparte and pronounced order on 23.5.2013 (Annexure A-5) whereby it confirmed addition made by authorities and dismissed appeal of assessee. assessee filed application for recalling order dated 23.5.2013 (Annexure A-5) which was also rejected vide order dated 26.8.2013 (Annexure A-6). Hence, present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that on 6.11.2012 and 27.2.2013, Bench did not function and matter was adjourned. On 20.5.2013, none had appeared on behalf of assessee as no notice was issued for hearing of case. Accordingly, Tribunal after hearing case exparte on 20.5.2013, which was 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-07-2020 14:01:33 ::: ITA No. 335 of 2013 -3- pronounced on 23.5.2013 (Annexure A-5), dismissed appeal of assessee. It was urged that non-appearance on 20.5.2013 was unintentional. 4. On other hand, learned counsel for respondent supported orders passed by Tribunal. 5. After hearing learned counsel for parties and perusing record, reason for non-appearance of counsel for assessee before Tribunal on 20.5.2013 appears to be unintentional and bonafide. Accordingly, in interest of justice, orders dated 23.5.2013 (Annexure A-5) and dated 26.8.2013 (Annexure A-6) are set aside. matter is remitted to Tribunal to decide same afresh in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to parties and by passing speaking order. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 18, 2014 (FATEH DEEP SINGH) gbs JUDGE 3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-07-2020 14:01:33 ::: Sukhjit Singh v. CIT, Chandigarh