SUBASH RAM SHAW,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.WARD-48(3), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in trading business. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 29.09.2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 8,18,110/-. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order dated 29.12.2017, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 11,26,634/- after making additions of Rs. 2,16,887/- and Rs. 91,637/- on account of difference in sundry accounts and trading addition respectively.

Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no compliance on the Assessment Year: 2015-16 Subash Ram Shaw part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his appellate order dated 31.08.2018 passed ex- parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. This appeal of the assessee is, therefore being disposed of ex-parte after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) only twice on 16.08.2018 and 30.08.2018 and there is nothing in any impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to show that notices of the said hearings were duly served upon the assessee. It therefore cannot be said that proper and sufficient opportunity was afforded by the Ld. CIT(A) of being heard to the assessee before disposing of the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his impugned order passed ex-parte. Moreover, as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250, the Ld. CIT(A) 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(A) does not comply with these requirements. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 6th December, 2019.