RATNAKAR LAXMIKANT MANDHALE,,SOLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2),, SOLAPUR

The ground of appeal No.1 raised by assessee is against jurisdictional issue and the same reads as under:-

The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He admitted that appeal of assessee was fixed for hearing but on that date, the CIT(A) was on leave and thereafter, no notice of hearing was given to the assessee.

The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue has been decided on merits.

On perusal of record and after hearing both the learned Authorized Representatives, the first issue which arises in the present appeal is against ex- parte order passed by Commissioner. The perusal of appellate order reflects that the CIT(A) talks about various notices of hearing and he also scans the acknowledgement for notice of hearing dated 11.01.2017. The plea of assessee on the other hand is that the representation was made by learned Authorized Representative for the assessee. However, the CIT(A) was away on leave and hence mis-match in representation. In the totality of the above said facts and circumstances, there is merit in the plea of assessee. Following the principles of natural justice, the matter is set aside to the file of CIT(A), who shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the issue on merits. The assessee is also directed to co-operate and appear before the CIT(A) and file evidences / explanations with regard to merits of additions made. The ground of appeal No.1 raised by assessee is thus,

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