RACHANA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,AMRAVATI vs. ITO WARD 5 , AMRAVATI

During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(A) for A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 are ex-party orders which were passed by the learned CIT(A) without going onto the merits of the issues raised by the assessee. Thus, the learned Counsel submitted that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the appeals back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its cases before the learned CIT(A).

On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).

We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) granted ample opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the cases before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the orders passed by the learned CIT(A) for A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 are set aside and remit the matters to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matters afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a 3 Rachana Builders and Developers and 184/Nag./2024 justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.