DEBEN MAHATO SMRITI RAKSHA COMMITTEE,PURULIA vs. ACIT, CIR-3, ASANSOL

The assessee in the present case is an AOP, which is running an Educational Institution and Dairy. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 10.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs.1,50,764/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 30.03.2015, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.12,20,006/- as under:- (i) Estimated profit from Dairy Rs.5,38,463/- business calculated @ 8% on the total receipts of Rs.67,30,788/- Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Deben Mahato Smriti Raksha Committee

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his appellate order dated 22.04.2019 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. In support of the preliminary issue raised by the assessee in this appeal challenging the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that there was an in-fighting going on between the members of the assessee-society during the relevant period and therefore, the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing could not be complied with. Keeping in view this submission made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non-appearance of the assessee when its appeal was called for hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Even the ld. D.R. has not raised any objection in this regard. Moreover, the ld. CIT(Appeals) as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250 was required to dispose of the appeal of the assessee vide an order in writing stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. It is observed that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) does not comply with these requirements. I, therefore, Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Deben Mahato Smriti Raksha Committee consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit in accordance with law after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on January 13, 2020.