Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member):- 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2009-10 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)- 36/IT-261/ACIT-24(3)/2016-17 dated 24/01/2018 qua confirmation of certain additions. The assessee has also challenged validity of reassessment proceedings.
During hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee [AR] pleaded for adjournment which was rejected. The Ld. AR, in the alternative, submitted that that impugned order is an ex-parte order since the assessee could not appear during appellate proceedings and therefore, the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR pleaded that there was no infirmity in the impugned order.
Upon careful consideration, the bench formed an opinion that keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the matter was to be restored back to the file of Ld. first appellate authority as per submissions made by Ld. AR. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate his stand failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to dispose-off the same on the basis of material on record.
The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/05/2019.