SHARPLINE NETWORK P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-23(1), NEW DELHI

After hearing both the sides I find the assessee is a company engaged in the business of setting up of TV channels and network. It filed its return of income on 25.09.2015 declaring nil income. The Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s. 143 (3) rejected the claim of agricultural income shown by the assessee and treated the same as “income from other sources”. Since none appeared before the CIT(A) despite opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee due to non prosecution.

In my opinion the Ld. CIT(A) cannot dismiss the appeal for non prosecution and he has to pass a speaking order deciding the issue before him. I, therefore, deem it proper to restore the issue to his file with a direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to explain his case failing which he is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. However, he has to decide the appeal on merit even if the assessee does not appear. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also undertook to appear before the CIT(A) and explain the case. I, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh and in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised