RAVINDRA KUMAR RAI,JHANSI vs. ITO , CHAHATARPUR

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) in paragraph No. 5 & 6 of the impugned orders, referring to the orders in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattahargee & Ors. 118 ITR 461 and Tribunal order in the matter of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320(Del), has decided the appeals in limine, as the assessee could not avail reasonable opportunity of being heard on merits. It was submitted that the assessee needs one more opportunity of hearing to put up its cases on merits, as the ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeals has not gone deep into the merits of additions.

Per contra the ld. DR relying upon the orders of ld. CIT(A) submitted that reasonable opportunities of being heard were afforded to the assessee and therefore, the impugned orders need no interference.

We have heard the rival contentions and have gone through entire material available on record. It is borne out on record that the impugned orders have been passed ex parte qua assessee and the appeals have been dismissed by relying on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. (supra). As per provisions of section 250(6) of the IT Act, the ld. CIT(A) is required to decide the appeals on merits, thereby incorporating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision, which is lacking in the present cases. In such view of the matter, we deem it expedient in the interest of justice to remand all these appeals to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeals afresh on merits in terms of the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given proper opportunity of being heard before finally deciding the appeals on merits.

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.