ROHIT BABULAL PATEL, (PROP M/S. STAR ENTERPRISE & IND.),AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(4),, AHMEDABAD

By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 23rd September, 2016 passed by the by the CIT(A), , Ahmedabad-5, in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14.

When this appeal was taken up for hearing, it was noticed that the impugned order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the learned CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and that the appellant could not attend the proceedings before the CIT(A). The impugned order is thus passed without the benefit of assistance by the assessee appellant and the assessee appellant is now in appeal before us.

At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submits that the entire business premises of the assessee were taken under the control and lock & key of Bank of Baroda as the assessee has failed to repay the bank loans; therefore, the notices issued by the CIT(A) at the address of the office could not be served on the assessee, and, thus, assessee could not be complied with the notices issued by the CIT(A). He further submits that the impugned order was also not served upon the assessee by the CIT(A).

In response to a question from the Bench, learned Departmental Representative fairly agreed that he has no objection to the matter being remitted to

In view of this discussion and bearing in mind entirety of the case, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and the assessee appellant be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. We order so.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 25th June, 2018