SHRI PARSHOTTAMBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL (HUF),ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, ANAND

The assessee in the captioned appeal has raised several grounds assailing the order of the CIT(A) for dismissal of the appeal of the [Shri Parshottambhai Chaturbhai Patel (HUF) vs. ITO] A.Y. 2009-10 - 2 - assessee. However, it is noticed that one of the substantive grounds raised by the assessee whereby the assessee seeks to impugn the order of the CIT(A) towards alleged violation of principles of natural justice and disposal of first appellate order ex parte.

We have perused the orders of the AO & the CIT(A). We notice that the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex parte order whereby the CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution. We also notice that the CIT(A) has not rendered any decision on merits as obligated under s.250(6) of the Act. Some opportunities have been given to the assessee but the assessee appears to have not attended before the CIT(A). The negligence of the assessee has propelled the CIT(A) to hold that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. The CIT(A) has thus endorsed the action of the AO whereby jantri value of the property sold was replaced against the actual sale consideration for the purposes of determination of capital gains.

In the context, we refer to Section 250(6) of the Act which enjoins that the CIT(A) shall state the points for determination before it and the decision shall be rendered on such points alongwith reasons for the decision. It was thus incumbent upon the CIT(A) to deal with the grounds on merits even in an ex parte order. A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on the various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A) could not have shunned the appeal for non-compliance without addressing the issue on merits.

In the totality of circumstances, we consider it just and expedient to restore the matter back to the CIT(A) in the larger interest of justice with a view to enable the assessee to avail proper opportunity for disposal of appeal by the CIT(A) on various points. Needless to say, the [Shri Parshottambhai Chaturbhai Patel (HUF) vs. ITO] A.Y. 2009-10 - 3 - assessee shall extend full co-operation to the CIT(A) without any demur, failing which, the CIT(A) shall at liberty to conclude the appellate proceedings in accordance with law. Hence, the order of the CIT(A) appealed against, is set aside and all the issues raised in the impugned appeal are restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

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