SUSANTI DEI,BARIPADA vs. ITO WARD-1, , BARIPADA

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is engaged in the business of securities transaction and filed her return of income on 14.06.2017 declaring total income at Rs.2,75,530/-. It was also submitted that the AO has wrongly estimated the net profit of the assessee @17.7878% on the total turnover on adhoc basis without considering the submission of the assessee. It was further submitted by the ld. AR that in the appellate proceeding before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee was unable to represent her case and the ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard. Thus, it was the prayer that the issue in the appeal may be restored to the file of CIT(A) for 2 which the assessee would be able to substantiate her claim before the ld. CIT(A).

In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld.CIT(A).

I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case shows that the assessee could not represent her case before the ld. CIT(A) properly, as a result of which, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution. On perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), it is found that the ld. CIT(A) has also not adjudicated the issue on merits. During the course of hearing, ld. AR requested that the assessee may be provided one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. CIT(A). In view of the above and considering the prayer of the ld.AR of the assessee, the issue involved in the present appeal is restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.