Kartikeya Surendra Shukla v. ITO, Ward-10(2), Ahmedabad - 2016-LL-0930-22

Citation	2016-LL-0930-22
Appellant Name	Kartikeya Surendra Shukla
Respondent Name	ITO, Ward-10(2), Ahmedabad
Court	ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	30/09/2016
Assessment Year	2009-10
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	unexplained cash • cash deposit
Bot Summary:	Ld. Counsel for the assessee contends that at the relevant time the assessee was not well and therefore he could not attend the proceedings which resulted in the impugned ex parte order by ld. It is contended that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not attending the appellant proceedings. CIT(A) with the following prayers:- a) The assessee expressed deep regrets for the ex parte order and is willing to bear the cost in this behalf; b) It is undertaken that the appellate proceedings will be promptly and positively attended. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on following conditions:- i) The assessee shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/-. Ii) The assessee shall not delay the appeal hearing without a reasonable cause. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above.

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 252/Ahd/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Kartikeya Surendra Shukla ITO, 2, Vishwa Bharati Society, Vs Ward-10(2), Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-6 Ahmedabad PAN : ACIPS 7279 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.M. Mehta, with Shri Gulab Thakor, ARs Revenue by : Shri Rahul Kumar, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 30/09/2016 Date of Pronouncement: 30/09/2016 ORDER This is assessees appeal challenging ex parte order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad confirming addition of Rs.17,85,000/- as unexplained cash deposits. 2. Ld. Counsel for assessee contends that at relevant time assessee was not well and therefore he could not attend proceedings which resulted in impugned ex parte order by ld. CIT(A). It is contended that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not attending appellant proceedings. Therefore, in interest of justice, appeal may be set aside and restored back to file of ld. CIT(A) with following prayers:- a) assessee expressed deep regrets for ex parte order and is willing to bear cost in this behalf; b) It is undertaken that appellate proceedings will be promptly and positively attended. SMC-ITA No. 252/Ahd/2014 Shri Kartikeya Surendra Shukla vs. ITO AY : 2009-10 2 3. Ld. DR, on other hand, supported orders of ld. CIT(A). 4. I have heard rival contentions, perused material available on record and gone through orders of lower authorities. In view of facts and circumstances, I am of view that ends of justice will be met if issue is set aside and restored back to file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on following conditions:- i) assessee shall pay cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only). challan whereof shall be produced before ld. CIT(A) along with copy of this order with request to fix hearing of appeal. ii) assessee shall not delay appeal hearing without reasonable cause. 5. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above. Order pronounced in Court on 30th September, 2016 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Ahmedabad; Dated 30/09/2016 Biju T. Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. ,DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ,ITAT, Ahmedabad Kartikeya Surendra Shukla v. ITO, Ward-10(2), Ahmedabad

Metadata

Judgment