M/S. NILKANTH HEIGHTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/s. Nilkanth Heights Pvt. Limited 2. The order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is a very brief order and the relevant part reads as under:- “The appellant was sent notices of hearing/submission on 22.01.2021, 15.11.2021 & 22.08.2022. There were adjournment requests only on 09.12.2021, 21.12.2021 & 07.04.2022, but no reply/submission was received from the appellant afterwards. Therefore, it seems appellant has no interest in pursuing the appeal. Hence, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the assessing officer. In sum, appeal is dismissed”.

A perusal of the above order would suggest that it is not in consonance with the mandate given in sub-section (6) of section 250. Sub-Clause (6) would contemplate that the ld. CITA would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of his conclusion on those points. In the present case, ld. CIT(Appeals) failed to record any reason on the points, which are discussed by the ld. Assessing Officer. It is also observed that a perusal of the above order would suggest that the last notice was issued on 07.04.2022 but the impugned order of dismissal has been passed on 02.09.2022, i.e. almost five months of the alleged notice given to the assessee, which was not attended. The ld. CIT(Appeals) ought to have given a notice to the assessee, if there was such a gap. The ld. CIT(Appeals) was bound to decide the appeal on merit even if it is an ex-parte order, therefore, it is not sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) and remit this issue to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merit. The ld. Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/s. Nilkanth Heights Pvt. Limited CIT(Appeals) would issue fresh notice of hearing to the asseessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on October 10, 2023.