AGRY BUSINESS CENTRE,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(9), BHAVNAGAR

The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant and rejecting the request for condonation of delay without considering the totality of the fact of the case.

The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)_National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in not disposing the following grounds raised before him. Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2–

The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing.

On perusal of the record, we find that notices of hearing were issued on several occasions, however, the assessee failed to furnish the requisite documents. There was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee did not furnish sufficient cause for condonation of the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as not admitted. We further note that the assessee had not complied even during the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, if granted an opportunity, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished to the Revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3–

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.