ANIL JAIN,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD-36(2), NEW DELHI

At the threshold, Ld. AR submitted that in this case AO has passed the exparte order u/s. 144 of the Act. Subsequently, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by affirming the action of the AO and even without deciding the matter on merits of the case by passing a non-speaking order. Hence, it was requested to remit back the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find considerable cogency in the contention of the Ld. AR that AO has passed the exparte order u/s. 144 of the Act and similarly, Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the action of the AO by holding as under:- “6.1.3. …In view of the above, submission made by the appellant is not acceptable. Hence, addition made by the AO amounting to Rs. 1,90,86,605/- is hereby confirmed and accordingly grounds of objection 3,5 & 6 raised by the appellant is hereby rejected.” 3.1 After perusing the aforesaid findings, we are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) has not given proper finding and passed a non-speaking order. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid factual matrix and in the interest of justice, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which ld. DR has no objection. We hold and direct accordingly. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings before him.