Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI B BENCH, MUMBAI
Per Pramod Kumar VP 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the ex-parte order dated 13th August 2013 passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. Grievances raised by the assessee appellant, as set out in the memorandum of appeal, are as follows:
1. 1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 11,21,200 to the total income of the assessee on account of cash deposits in the bank account.
2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal erred in conforming addition of Rs. 51,65,141 to the total income of the assessee on account of investment made in NSE and BSE.
3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal erred in conforming THE DISALLOWANCE of deductions claimed under chapter vi A to the extent of 38,171 ITA No.: 517/Mum/2022 Assessment year: 2009-10 Page 2 of 3 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal erred in conforming the disallowance of the loss of 63,795 which was to be carried forward.
When this appeal came up for hearing it was noticed that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) is passed ex-parte qua the assessee on the ground that despite the assessee having being given sufficient opportunities, there was non- compliance of the notices of hearing issued by the learned CIT(A). When learned counsel for the assessee was confronted with this observation in the impugned order it is submitted that non-compliance was for bonafide reasons beyond his control and that if given another opportunity of hearing before the learned CIT(A), he will ensure that there is scrupulous compliance to the notices issued by the learned CIT(A). It was thus submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. Learned Departmental Representative did not seriously oppose the prayers so made by the learned counsel for the assessee even though it was pointed out that the assessee’s past conduct does not inspire much faith in his present assurances.
Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice and equity one more opportunity of hearing before the learned CIT(A) should be given to the assessee. We therefore, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication de-novo by way of the speaking order, in accordance with the law, and of course after giving yet another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also deem it appropriate to caution the assessee to ensure that there is full cooperation on the assessee's part to ensure expeditious disposal of the remand proceedings. With these directions the matter stands restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) 5. As the matter is being remitted for fresh adjudication by the learned CIT(A), we see no need to deal with the grievances raised on merits. All these grievances, given our directions for remand to the learned CIT(A), are academic as of now. 6. In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court today on the 27th day of June, 2022.