SHEETALAYA,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT,, ALLAHABAD

PER A. D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Allahabad, dated 23/1/2015 for assessment year 1988- 89. 2. By virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal ex-parte qua the assessee. While dismissing the appeal of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has not given any details to verify its claim. The ld. CIT(A) has also not mentioned in his order with regard to the issuance/service of notice of hearing on the assessee to enable it to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and contest its case. 3. Heard. We find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without providing proper opportunity to the assessee. Moreover, he has not decided the appeal after discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of

ITA No.213/ALLD/2015 Page 2 of 2

the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/11/2019.

Sd/- Sd/- [T. S. KAPOOR] [A. D. JAIN] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

DATED:22/11/2019 JJ:2111