JUBILEE HILLS LANDMARK PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Briefly the facts of the case are, assessee company engaged in the business of development and real estate, filed its return of income for the AY 2013-14 on 26/09/2013 admitting loss of Rs. 18,93,65,612/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) dated 21/08/2015 were issued. In response to the said notices, the AR of assessee filed the information as called for.

Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A).

The CIT(A) passed ex-parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee by observing that despite sufficient opportunities provided neither the assessee nor AR furnished any evidence during appellate proceedings also rebutting the conclusions drawn by the AO, therefore, the AO justified in making the above mentioned additions.

Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

In the grounds of appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the notices issued by the CIT(A) fixing the appeal for hearing on 26,05/2017, 08/06/2017 and on 22/06/2017, were not received by the assessee, hence, there was no compliance to the said dates.

Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) ought to have noticed that the assessee claimed a loss of Rs. 18,93,65,612/- for the year in the return of income which was disallowed by the AO and ought to have considered that non-

Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice from the record that ld. CIT(A) has fixed the date for hearing on three occasions. In those dates, due to some reasons, ld. AR unable to appear before him. It was submitted that in the last occasion i.e. on 22.06.17 it was not the intentional but due to circumstantial difficulties, it was not represented. Therefore, in the interest of justice, assessee should be given another opportunity and further we notice that the case was dismissed within a short period of time of two months. Accordingly, we remit this case back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open Court on 11th May, 2018.