SHRI GULRAJ KARAMCHAND RUPANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 27(1)(5), MUMBAI

At the outset, learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte, without hearing the assessee. He submitted that the learned CIT(A) appears to have sent the notices of hearing of the I.T. Act on ITBA portal. However, the assessee is not well versed with the operation of computers and verification of income tax website. Hence he did not notice the notices sent by Ld CIT(A) and hence could not represent properly before the learned CIT(A). The Learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) has confirmed the addition on the basis of Statement of facts filed by the 2 Gulraj Karamchand Rupani assessee along with the appeal memo, i.e., without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee, which is against principles of natural justice.

The Learned DR, on the contrary, submitted that the learned CIT(A) has issued notices of hearing on ITBA and the assessee has failed to respond to the said notices and hence he was constrained to pass the order on the basis of material available on record.

Having heard the rival submissions, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to present his case before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

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