SRI MURARI MANNA,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. I.T.O.,WARD-27(4), PURBA MEDINIPUR

At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of ten days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, a petition has been filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the said delay and keeping in view the reasons given therein, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the delay of ten days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Even the ld. D.R. has not raised any objection in this regard. The said delay is, therefore, condoned and this appeal of the assessee is being disposed of on merit.

The assessee in the present case is an individual, who is engaged in the business of trading of betel leaves. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 16.01.2015 declaring total income of Rs.2,84,140/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 08.08.2016, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.23,56,897/- after making an addition of Rs.20,72,757/- to the total income of the assessee on account of unexplained investment.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no satisfactory 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 14.01.2019 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 its appeal for non- prosecution, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that none of the notices stated to be issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing from time to time was ever received by the assessee and such non-receipt of notices resulted in the non-appearance of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Keeping in view the 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 his 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- Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shri Murari Manna section (6) of section 250 was required to dispose of the appeal of the assessee vide 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, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit in accordance with law after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and shall extend all the possible cooperation so as to enable the ld. CIT(Appeals) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.