M/S NUMERIC COMMODEAL PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. I.T.O.,WARD-9(4), KOLKATA

None appeared for the assessee. However, on a perusal of the grounds of appeal i.e. (ground No. 3) the assessee is aggrieved by the ex parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without hearing the assessee. From a perusal of ground no. 3 it revealed that assessee has not received the notice fixing the date of hearing. It is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has fixed the dates of hearing on three occasions i.e on 03.12.2018, 26.12.2018 and 22.01.2019. However, according to Ld. CIT(A), none appeared on behalf of the assessee, therefore, he passed the ex parte order without hearing the assessee. In the grounds of appeal the assessee has assailed the action of the Ld. CIT(A) by stating that the notices fixing the date of hearing have not been received by the assessee. It is noted that in the impugned order, the Ld. CIT(A) has not stated about any proof of service of notice. In such a scenario, without serving of notice the assessee cannot be expected to be present during the appeal. Since the impugned order has been passed without hearing the assessee per se there is a violation of Natural Justice and, therefore, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and, therefore, necessarily has to be set aside. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair-play, I am inclined to restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the Numeric Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. AY- 2009-10 appeal after hearing the assessee and the assessee is directed to be diligent in future and to attend the appellate proceedings without fail.

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