M/S. KANAK JEWELLERY,KEONJHAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

At the outset, ld. Sr. DR submitted an adjournment application, however, looking to the facts of the case as also the impugned order is an ex-parte order, therefore, the Bench proceeded to dispose off the appeal of the assessee.

The appeal of the assessee is barred by 13 days. In this regard, ld. AR has filed condonation petition stating sufficient reasons for condoantion of delay. Ld. DR did not raise any serious objection. In view of the above, we condone the delay in filing the present appeal and the appeal of the assessee is disposed off accordingly.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee had filed appeal against the order of the AO before the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee had not received the notice of hearing from the ld. CIT(A). It was the prayer that the assessee may be granted another opportunity to represent its appeal before the ld. AO.

In reply, ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue on merits and no reason that issues to be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) as the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment proceedings nor before the ld. CIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of para 4.3 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the assessee could not file any documentary evidence before the AO. Even before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee could not substantiate its claim by bringing any cogent material on record. However, the ld. AR has filed now before the Tribunal at the time of hearing the documents are required by the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) during the course of assessment proceedings as well as the appellate proceedings. In view of the above, in the interest of natural justice and to grant the assessee another chance to correct its actions and comply with the notices issued, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of