ARIHANT STEEL EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT (A) has passed exparte order without deciding the issue on merits. In this case, the appeal was migrated to NFAC and on the first occasion assessee had sought for M/s. Arihant Steel Exports adjournment and on the next date, the notice of hearing could not be received and therefore, assessee was not aware of date intimated by the ld. CIT(A). Further, ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore, he submitted that in the interest of justice, matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to be decided afresh.

Ld. DR also does not have any objection as the appeal has not been decided on merits.

In view of the aforesaid fact that ld. CIT (A) has decided the appeal exparte without going to the merits of the case, therefore, in the interest of justice, matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to be decided afresh and in accordance with the law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to comply with the notices to substantiate its case.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.