MANISH SOHANRAJ BAFNA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(2)(3), MUMBAI

AadoSa / O R D E R महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य/ PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in appeal No. CIT(A)-30/19(2)(3)/82/2015-16 dated 20.04.2018. The Assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-19(2)(3), 2 Mumbai (in short ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2012-13 vide dated 13.02.2015 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the CIT(A) has decided the appeal by an ex-parte order but, the assessee has never received any notices for fixation of appeal, though the assessee requested for change to new address vide letter dated 16.11.2017. The notice was never served on new address. Therefore, assessee could not attend the hearing before CIT(A). For this assessee has raised the following ground No. 1 & 2: -

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(A)-30, Mumbai has erred in dismissing the appeal by passing an ex- parte order due to non-appearance of anyone of the dates fixed for hearing before the Learned CIT(A). The impugned order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice.