SANJAY KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 31(2), NEW DELHI

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, New Delhi dated 18.07.2018 for assessment year 2010-11.

Ld. AR of the Assessee submitted that the appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing on 13.04.2018 and 10.05.2018. The CIT(A) observed that there was no compliance to the notice sent through e-mail on 13.04.2018 for hearing of the appeal on 07.05.2018. He further observed that no response to the notice dated 10.05.2018 fixing the hearing on 06.06.2018 on a request of the assessee hearing was adjourned to 10.07.2018 and on that date there was no compliance. Therefore the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.

The Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that on 10.07.2018 the date fixed for hearing assessee had requested for adjournment. The CIT(A) has not rejected the said application but dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. He submitted that in the interest of justice the matter should be remanded back to his file for adjudicating the appeal on merits.

The Departmental Representative had no objection to the above submission of the AR of the assessee.

In the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that in order to render substantial justice to the assessee the appeal should be restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh after allowing reasonable and proper opportunity of the hearing to the assessee. I, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for adjudicating the appeal of the assessee afresh after allowing reasonable and proper opportunity of the hearing to the assessee.