KAILASH CHANDER,HISAR vs. ITO, WARD- 2, HISAR

At the outset, ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the impugned order has been passed ex parte by the ld. CIT(A) without considering the written submissions and additional grounds furnished before her. He, therefore, prayed to remand the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with direction to decide the appeal afresh after considering the written submissions so made by the assessee before her. Ld. AR further submitted that under similar circumstances when the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex parte for the assessment year 2009-10, a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal remanded the same to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) by order dated 14/1/2020 in directing the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh after considering the written submissions of the assessee on merits.

It is the submission of the Ld. DR that in spite of granting several opportunities the assessee failed to avail the same and there was no representation for the assessee when the matter was fixed for hearing and, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was left with no option but to decide the matter on merits, but in the absence of the assessee. He submitted that unless and until the assessee is put on terms, the same thing is likely to happen this time also, if the matter is remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh disposal. He, therefore, prayed that, if any reason the Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee may be put on terms.

We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. It could be seen from the record that the appeal of the assessee has been decided ex parte and the grievance of the assessee is that no reasonable opportunity is granted to the assessee to put forth their case. Further, the copy of the order dated 14/1/2020 in for the assessment year 2009-10 in assessee’s own case shows that the matter for the assessment year 2009-10 was remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration and to disposed of on merits. Considering these facts and taking into consideration the circumstances reported by the ld. DR on assessees request for remanding the case, we find it appropriate in the interest of justice that the matter should be remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the appeal afresh after affording an opportunity to the assessee to put forth their case. Needless to say, the assessee shall prosecute the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date fixed for hearing and it is made clear that no further opportunity would be granted to the assessee if he fails to avail the same. We order accordingly.

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