HAMD FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of Foods Processing & related activities. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee company has filed various details / documents / information that were looked into. By the AO. The accounts of the assessee company were audited and copy of audit report alongwith Profit and Loss account and balance sheet was furnished. In this case an information was received from DDIT(Inv.)-II, Ghaziabad in respect of bogus purchases / expenses amounting to Rs. 10,00,000/- made by the assessee company with Shri Mohd.

At the outset, it is submitted by the Ld. AR that assessee has taken a common ground in both the appeals that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the non-appearance / non- compliance is neither wilful nor intentional, as the father of the Director of the assessee company was having grave ill-health, as a result thereof, the matter could not be attended for bona-fide reasons, which were completely beyond the control of the assessee. In support of this contention, she placed the medical reports/records of the father of the assessee. Hence, she requested that matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) in both the appeals for fresh adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the appeals on merits of the case, for which Ld. DR has no objection.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we find considerable cogency in the aforesaid contention of the Ld. AR for the assessee, therefore, in our considered view interest of justice will be served, if the issues are 2 | P a g e remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), with the directions to decide the same afresh on merits of the case, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly.