M/S.DARSHAN CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR-13(3), MUMBAI

आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. Darshan Construction ACIT-Central Circle 13(3) Laxmi Building, 117, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Ranjana Deshmukh Marg M.K. Road Vs. Aai Mai Merwanji Road Mumbai- 400 020. Parel (East), Mumbai- 400 012. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACFD-1634-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri P.K. Parida-Ld.AR Revenue by : Ms. Jyothilakshmi Nayak- Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 17/02/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 20/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2011-12 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-28/IT-662/ACIT-17(1)/2014-15 dated 10/10/2017 on certain grounds of appeal

. By way of Ground No.1, the assessee has also raised the issue of violation of principle of natural justice since the 2 M/s. Darshan Construction Assessment Year :2011-12 impugned order is an ex-parte order. It has been stated in the grounds of appeal that there was change of address which prevented the assessee to make appearances before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee remained negligent in attending the appellate proceedings.

2. In the above background, we find that the assessee was assessed for year under consideration u/s. 143(3) on 27/03/2014 wherein it was saddled with aggregate additions / disallowances for Rs.62.82 Lacs. Although the assessee agitated the additions before Ld. CIT(A), but failed to attend the proceedings despite being provided with several opportunities of hearing as detailed in the impugned order. Consequently, the additions were confirmed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3. Upon due consideration of factual matrix, the bench formed an opinion that principal of natural justice would demand that the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we deem it fit to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on merits. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate its claim failing which Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to dispose-off the appeal on the basis of material on record.

4. Resultantly, appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th February, 2020. (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) उपा"" / Vice President लेखा सद" / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 20/02/2020 3 M/s. Darshan Construction Assessment Year :2011-12 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशकी"ितिलिपअ"ेि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. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.