SPM TRADELINKS P. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 22(1), NEW DELHI

Heard and perused the record.

The assessee has preferred the present appeal against order dated 19.09.2018 in appeal no. 265/17-18 for assessment year 2008-09 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or in short ‘Ld. F.A.A.’) wherein the appeal was dismissed upholding the assessment order dated 22.03.2016 u/s 144/147 of the 2398/Del/2019 SPM Tradelinks P. Ltd. 2 Income Tax Act, 1961 while the assessee/ appellant had failed to appear before the ld. CIT(A).

As the case was called for hearing today, non-appeared for the assessee / appellant and the record shows that notices have been issued and earlier report was received that ‘at the given address there is no such firm’.

Accordingly, arguments of Ld. DR were heard who had supported the orders of Ld. Tax Authorities below submitting that assessee is trying to take advantage of his own wrongs without appearing before any of the tax authorities.

Appreciating the matter on record, it can be observed that in the impugned order of ld. CIT(A), notices were issued to the assessee/ appellant but was not served. In para no. 3.1 of its order, Ld. CIT(A) even mentions that assessee has not given its complete address. However, he proceeded to dismiss the appeal without considering the merits of the grounds raised before it and that itself is an error requiring interference herein. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and is restored to the files of ld. CIT(A) to proceed further to decide the appeal on merits instead of dismissing for non- prosecution and an opportunity of hearing be given to assessee through counsel Sh. Vinod Kumar Goel, Advocate 282, Boundary Road, Civil lines, Meerut and E-mail Vinodgoelv@gmail.com.