Jyoti v. Jani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1235 of 2018 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3VersusNEELU GUPTA ==========================================================Appearance:MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA Date : 09/10/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 05.04.2018 raising following questions for our consideration: “A.Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the order passed by the CIT(A) on the ground that CIT(A) had not rendered any decision on merits without appreciating the fact that due to total non-compliance on part of the assessee despite granting sufficient opportunities? B.Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in law and on facts while holing that there is no reasons for an appellate Forum being by passed and the matter being taken up directly before it for adjudication on merits? C.Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the matter to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication without taking into consideration whether there were justifiable grounds for making total non-compliance by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer?” C/TAXAP/1235/2018 ORDER 2. Similar issue came up before us in Tax Appeal No. 1192 of 2018. This Tax Appeal was dismissed by making following observations. “1.Revenue is in appeal against judgment of the Incometax Appellate Tribunal dated 28.3.2018. Tribunal remanded the proceedings for consideration of CIT (Appeals) on the ground that the appeal order was exparte. Learned counsel for the appellant is justified in making a grievance that the Tribunal did not put some check or restriction on the assessee so that sense of seriousness is brought about in the proceedings. In our prima facie view, even if the Tribunal was inclined to grant opportunity to participate in the proceedings, at least imposition of fair amount of cost could have been considered. This would bring in a level of seriousness required on the part of the assessee while facing assessment proceedings. However, only for such purpose, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal, since otherwise we do not find any question of law arising. In future assure the Tribunal would bear in mind these observations.” In the result, this Tax Appeal is also dismissed. (AKIL KURESHI, J) JYOTI V. JANI (B.N. KARIA, J)