No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aggrieved by confirmation of certain penalty of Rs.9.00 Lacs u/s. 271D by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Thane [CIT (A)], vide Appeal No.76-THN/14-15, order dated 15/05/2018, the assessee is under further appeal before us.
During hearing, although none was present for assessee, however, it could be borne out of impugned order that it is an ex-parte order since Balachandran A. Pillai Assessment Year: 2011-12 the assessee failed to make effective representation before first appellate authority. The Ld. DR pleaded for dismissal of appeal.
After careful consideration, keeping in view the principle of natural justice and in view of the fact that the assessee is an individual, the bench deems it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate his claim forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to dispose-off the appeal on the basis of material on record.
Resultantly, the appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09th November, 2020.
Sd/- Sd/- (Saktijit Dey) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) �ाियक सद� / Judicial Member लेखा सद� / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांकDated : 09/11/2020 Sr.PS:-Jaisy Varghese आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��थ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयु�/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाईल / Guard File 6.