M/S. ACCLAIM INDUSTRIES LTD,,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -8,, PUNE

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 19-03-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2009-10.

We find this appeal was filed with a delay of 648 days. To condone the said delay, the assessee filed notarized affidavit dated 15-07-2019 explaining the reasons for delay. On perusal of the same upon hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons explained by the ld. AR are bonafide which really prevented the assessee to file the appeal in time. Therefore, the delay of 648 days are condoned.

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. The ld. CIT(A) went on to pass an order based on the material available on record namely, statement of facts and grounds of appeal as per Form-35 while filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The ld. AR prayed that one final opportunity may be provided to the assessee so that the matter may be discussed and represented on merits before the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, it should be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A).

We have perused the case record and heard the rival contentions and also have given thoughtful consideration to the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). We find that it is an ex-parte order where rights and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon. Since there was no appearance on record by the assessee and order of ld. CIT(A) was based only on materials available on records i.e. statement of facts, grounds of appeal filed by the assessee and the assessment order, the assessee should be given one final opportunity to defend his case through proper documentary evidences. In the interest of justice, we therefore, set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, the impugned order is set aside. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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