M/S AGARWAL TRANSLINK PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 15 (1)(1), MUMBAI

The assessee has filed the present application for early hearing of appeal 26.08.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT (A)-24, Mumbai, inter alia on the ground that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee as no notice was sent by the Ld. CIT(A) to secure the presence of the assessee on the date of hearing.

Before us, the Ld. counsel for the applicant/appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity to being heard to the assessee as no notice was sent to the assessee either by post or by email. The Ld. counsel further pointed out that inspection of record carried out in the office of the Ld. CIT (A) revealed that no notice was sent by the post, however, notice by e-mail was sent to the wrong email address i.e., lodhaanil160@gmail.com as against the correct e-mail address mentioned in Form No. 35 as lodhaanil60@gmail.com. Since, no notice was received, the assessee could not file any paper book or submissions in support of its case before the Ld. CIT (A). Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is liable to be set Assessment Year: 2011-12 aside and sent back for fresh adjudication. The Ld. counsel further submitted that in view of the said facts, this appeal may be fixed for early hearing on out of turn basis or the same may be sent back to the Ld. CIT (A) for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. departmental representative did not controvert the submissions made by the Ld. counsel. The Ld. DR further did not oppose the prayer of the counsel to hear the case on priority or to send the appeal back to the Ld. CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. 4. We have perused the material on record in the light of the submissions made by the Ld. counsel for the assessee. As pointed out by the Ld. counsel, the Ld. CIT (A) has passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee as no notice was sent to the assessee by email on the address furnished by the assessee. Hence, we find merit in the contention of the assessee that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is bad in law, which requires fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and with the consent of both the parties send this appeal back to the Ld. CIT (A) for deciding the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the applicant/appellant. Accordingly, we allow the appeal for statistical purposes. 5. Since, we have disposed of the appeal of the assessee, the application filed by the assessee for early hearing has become infructuous. Hence, we dismiss the same. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th February, 2020. (PRAMOD KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER