BALESWAR OILS (P) LTD., ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO (TDS), HOOGHLY , HOOGHLY

1. This is an appeal preferred by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A), 24 dated 29.01.2018 for A.Y. 2012-13 passed u/s 221 of the Income tax Act, 1961.

We note that there is delay of one day in filing the appeal. According to the assessee because of the non-handing over of the impugned order in time, the learned AR could not file the appeal within the time stipulated by the statute which caused one day’s delay. The learned DR does not have any objection. So we condone the delay.

At the outset we note that it is an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). According to the ld. AR, the hearing was fixed on 21.12.2017 and thereafter on 11.01.2018 and 24.01.2018. According to the ld. AR the first notice the assessee received was only on 22.12.2017 i.e. one day after the appeal was fixed on 21.12.2017 and, therefore, the assessee could not appear and thereafter the matter were fixed within the interval of 13 days and since the assessee received the notice late it could not appear. In such a scenario, we note

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.