MR.BALACHANDRA HULKOTI(HUF) ,GADAG vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WRAD-1, GADAG

ITA No.3056(B)/2018 2 2. It has been submitted that assessee neither appeared nor filed any details/submissions before Ld.CIT(A) despite notices being issued.

Ld. CIT (A) therefore decided the issue based upon observations of Ld.AO.

Assessee is now submitting before us that an opportunity may be granted to represent its case before Ld.CIT(A). 4.1 Ld.DR objected to the same and submitted that despite sufficient opportunity, assessee has failed to appear before Ld.CIT (A) to defend the additions made by Ld.AO. It has been submitted that assessee do not deserves an opportunity of being heard for the second time under such circumstances.

We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us. 5.1 Ld.AR admitted to the fact that assessee failed to appear before Ld.CIT(A) to represent its case. However, the right of being heard cannot be denied to assessee. We are therefore of considered opinion to set aside the issue back to Ld.CIT(A) subject to cost of Rs.5000/-payable by assessee within 15 days of receipt of this order. Assessee is directed to pay the cost to Karnataka Chief Minister’s Relief Fund. Upon filing the proof of cost having deposited in along with affidavit, the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to issue notice of hearing to assessee. Assessee shall then file all requisite details in support of its claim which shall be verified by Ld.CIT(A) in accordance with law and decide the issue contested herein afresh 3 on merits by passing the speaking order. With the aforestated direction, we set aside appeal back to Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly ground raised