M/S FIDELITY TRADELINK (P) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O.,WARD-5(4), KOLKATA

None appeared for the assessee. However, I note that the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte and the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without going into the merits of the case and without considering the grounds of appeal

It has to be kept in mind thatif the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee has the right to file an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who is the First Appellate Authority. This right of the assessee is a statutory/vested right and the appeal so preferred by the assessee will become meaningless, if the First AppellateAuthority i.e. the ld. CIT(A) does not adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee on merits. Since in this case, the assessee did not bother to appear before him, resulted in dismissal of the appeal ex parte by the ld. CIT(A) without going into the merits of the case/without considering the grounds of appeal on merits. However, I am of the opinion that without hearing the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) ought not to have passed the impugned order. Even if he wanted to pass the order since none appeared on behalf of assessee despite service of notice, he should call for the assessment records and thereafter, pass the order on merits, which the ld. CIT(A) has not done.

I am also of the opinion that assessee needs to be vigilant and by merely filing the appeal the assessee cannot expect the First Appellate Authority ( ld. CIT-A) to decide the grounds raised without any supporting materials/documents and written submissions. I note that the ld. CIT(A) has noted that appeal was posted for hearing on thrice i.e 08-03- 2019, 28-03-2019 and 13-05-2019 and finding that none appeared on behalf of assessee he dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee. However, I note that though the ld. CIT(A) has stated to have fixed the appeals on three dates, however there is no mention about the service of notice/proof of service. So, I do not countenance the action of the ld. CIT(A) in ex parte dismissing the appeals. Since the ld. CIT(A) was expected to pass/adjudicate the grounds of appeal based on the records available and if necessary call for the assessment records, and then pass the order on merit. In the light of the above, I am of the opinion that assessee should have got proper opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(A). Be that as it may be, however, assessee is also expected to be vigilant and should pursue its appeal earnestly and diligently. I expect that after getting this order of the Tribunal, the assessee would file the correct postal address as well as correct e-mail id before the ld. CIT(A) and, thereafter, pursue the appeal diligently by filing written submissions as well as documents, if so advised, in support of the claim and be present either through its AYs. 2012-13 M/s. Fidelity TradelinkP.Ltd directors or through ld.AR and explain the facts and law in support of the grounds raised by the assessee. In the light of above discussion, the impugned orders of the ld. CIT(A) are set aside and the appeal is restored back to him ( ld. CIT-A) with a direction to adjudicate the grounds of appeal on merits after hearing the assessee/going through the submissions/documents and to pass a speaking order.

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