MR AMIT ASHOK THAWANI,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CIRCLE-23(1), MUMBAI

At the very outset, we noticed that the assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A). However, Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee had already filed all the details and his submission before Ld. CIT(A) but instead of deciding on merits, Ld. CIT(A) has simply rejected the appeal of the assessee.

After having gone though the facts of the present case and also hearing parties at length, we noticed that although the assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A), but had already filed all the details and the documents vide its submission and in this regard our attention was drawn to Form No. 35, wherein at paragraph 11 the assessee has mentioned entire facts alongwith supportive documentary evidences. Therefore considering the said facts, we are of the view that Ld. CIT(A) was not expected to adopt a shortcut method and dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution, more particularly when the assessee had filed all required documents before him. Since, Ld. CIT(A) was under legal obligation to decide the appeal on merits as he does not have any power to dismiss the appeal for non-

Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances and also keeping in view of the decision mentioned above, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal of the assessee on merits. Needless to mention after providing fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.