ABHAYA KUMAR DASH,NAYABAZAR, CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

Smt. Susmita Patnaik, Smt. Susmita Patnaik, ld AR appeared for the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR , ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. represented on behalf of the revenue.

I have c I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that A) clearly shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by passing a non by passing a non-speaking order, without mentioning the various grounds speaking order, without mentioning the various grounds P a g e 1 | 3 of appeal raised by the assessee in his appellate order and without discussing the merits of the case. It is further noticed that the ld CIT(A) has given various notices to produce the required documentary evidence but the assessee failed to comply to the same. Before me, ld AR has prayed to give one more opportunity to present his case before the ld CIT(A). Therefore, in the interests of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee . It may be mentioned that the assessee is directed to promptly comply with the notices of hearing and in case of any further default on part of the assessee to cause appearance, Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass orders on the basis of materials available on record, in accordance with law.

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