CHEL SERVICE STATION ,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 23(1) , HOOGHLY

At the outset itself, it has been brought to our notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order dated 14.08.2018 though the date fixed was 13.08.2018. According to Ld. AR, the date fixed for hearing though was on 13.08.2018 only one date i.e. on 25.07.2018 was given by the Ld. CIT(A). According to Ld. AR, the partner of assessee firm who is dealing with income tax matter is a cancer patient and was not in a position to attend the hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) on 13.08.2018. Since the assessee did not appear on that date before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex parte, which according to Ld. AR is against the principles of Natural Justice. He, therefore, urged before the bench to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We note that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex parte without hearing the assessee. We also note that the AO has passed the assessment order u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without providing sufficient opportunity of being

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th April, 2019 Sd/- (A. T. Varkey) Judicial Member Dated: 10th April, 2019 Jd.(Sr.P.S.)