MARUTI BABURAO BHUJABAL,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-27, MUMBAI

At the outset, learned AR submitted that the impugned revision order has been passed ex-parte, without presence of the assessee, since assessee did not appear before the learned PCIT. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee is eighty years old and he was doing business in APMC vegetable market. Due to change in the address of the assessee, notice issued by the learned PCIT physically did not reach him and hence the assessee could not appear before the learned PCIT. The Learned AR further submitted that the Bench had asked for the factual report from the Assessing Officer on an earlier occasion and the Assessing Officer given the factual report, wherein he has stated that there was no acknowledgement in the file with regard to the show-cause notice issued by the learned PCIT physically on 12.2.2021.

We have heard learned DR on this issue and perused the record. Having regard to the submission made by learned AR and factual aspect presented by the Assessing Officer, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to present his case before the learned PCIT. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned PCIT and restore all the issues to his file for examining them afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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