ARATI BEHERA,CUTTACK vs. DCIT ASMNT CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the exparte It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the exparte It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the exparte order without giving an opportunity to the assessee, which is gross violation order without giving an opportunity to the assessee, which is gross violation order without giving an opportunity to the assessee, which is gross violation of natural justice. He submitted that the ld CIT(A) has not of natural justice. He submitted that the ld CIT(A) has not of natural justice. He submitted that the ld CIT(A) has not also passed the P a g e 1 | 3 order on merits. He prayed that if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee would assist the ld CIT(A) in disposal of the appeal.

In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that several opportunities have been provided by the ld CIT(A) as is evident from the impugned order. Hence, no purpose would be served if the matter is restored to the file of the ld CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)Ltd., 38 ITD 320 and other decisions as the assessee failed to appear before him without considering the issue on merits. We observe that the provisions of section 250(6) are mandatory and it is obligatory for the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order stating points raised in appeals, his decision thereon and reasons for such decisions. The provisions of section 250(6) provide that the appellate order of Commissioner (A) are to state the points arising in the appeal, the decision of the authority thereon and the reasons for such decision. The underlying rationale of the provision is that such orders are subject to further appeal to the Tribunal. Speaking order would obviously enable a party to know precise points decided in his favour or against him. In the instant case, vide the impugned order, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without considering the facts and grounds raised

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