RHODONITE BUILDERS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 21(3), NEW DELHI

The assessee in its grounds of appeal has challenged the exparte order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the various additions made by the AO.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 21.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs.21,08.400/-. Despite various opportunities granted by the AO there was no compliance from the side of the assessee for which the AO completed the assessment u/s. 144/143(3) determining the total income at Rs.6,84,89,445/- wherein he made addition of Rs.6,63,09,047/- as unexplained investment unlisted equities u/s 69 of the IT Act 1961. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee despite number of opportunities granted by the CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) in the exparte order passed by him, sustained the addition made by the AO and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the notices were sent to the old address by the office of the CIT(A), therefore, there was no compliance before him for which the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Further the AO has also passed the order u/s. 144 of the IT Act. He accordingly submitted that in the interest of justice the matter should be remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. Page | 2

The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. She submitted that despite repeated opportunities granted by the AO there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. Similarly despite number of opportunities granted by the CIT(A) there was no compliance. Therefore, this type of attitude on the part of the assessee does not require any leniency and the order of the CIT(A) should be upheld.

We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an admitted fact that due to non appearance of the assessee despite opportunities granted both the lower authorities have passed exparte order. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and has not decided the appeal on merit. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) with a copy of this order on 25.03.2020 for hearing of its case. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly and the grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.