RITA ASHOK PAREKH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-CIRCLE 25(3), MUMBAI

Before us, the Ld A.R moved an application seeking adjournment. However, on a perusal of the order passed by Ld CIT(A), we notice that the Ld CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte, since the assessee did not responded to him despite giving four opportunities. The issue urged on merits was denial of deduction claimed u/s 54F of the Act. The Ld CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the AO observing that the assessee could not rebut the same during appellate proceedings. Hence we reject the adjournment request and proceed to dispose of the appeal.

Since the assessee did not appear before Ld CIT(A), there was no occasion available to the assessee to make her submissions. Hence we are of the view that the Ld CIT(A) was not justified in stating that the assessee did not rebut the assessment order. In any case, we notice that the Ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds urged on merits by a reasoned order. In fact, the assessee has raised a ground before the Tribunal with regard to violation of principle of natural justice. Hence, on a conspectus of the matter, we are of the view that all the issues urged before the Tribunal need to be restored to the file of the Ld CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh.

Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of Ld CIT(A). We also direct the assessee to fully co- operate with Ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal by furnishing all required information and explanation. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the Ld CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.