SURESH KUMAR SAHOO,PATITAPABANA PATANA NIMAPARA vs. ITO, WARD PURI

Shri B.K.Mahapatra, B.K.Mahapatra, ld AR appeared for the assessee. Shri the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without properly considering the documents and legal impugned order without properly considering the documents and legal impugned order without properly considering the documents and legal

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

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order without appreciating the facts on record. A perusal of the assessment order also shows that since the assessee has not appeared and furnished any documents in support of the claim, the Assessing Officer has passed the order u/s.144 of the Act. Now, ld AR undertakes that if the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, the assessee would be in a position to file all the documentary evidence in support of two issues i.e. addition made on account SBN and estimation of profit. Therefore, in the interest of justice, both the issues are restored back to the file of the Assessing officer for fresh adjudication after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in set aside proceedings and furnish all the required documents in support of the claim.

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