SMT. C JAYALAKSHMI,CHENNAI vs. ITO BUSINESS WARD XIII(2), CHENNAI

पीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri D.Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri V.M.Mahidar, JCIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.12.2018 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.12.2018 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Assessee through this appeal, which is directed against an order dated 22.12.2017 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai, raises a grievance that she was not given sufficient and effective opportunity by the learned CIT(A) before disposing of her appeal.

West Extension, Chennai. Assessing Officer had also made addition of ₹10,30,000/- for consideration received on sale of property. Though in her appeal before CIT(A), assessee assailed the above additions, it seems, nobody entered appearance for the assessee, when the case was posted for hearing by the learned CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) noted that notices sent to the assessee were returned unserved. Now, an undertaking has been orally made by learned AR before us, that if one more opportunity is given to the assessee, she would definitely enter appearance before the learned CIT(A) and present her case. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that matter can go back to the learned CIT(A) for consideration afresh. We therefore set aside the order of the Learned CIT(A) and remit the appeal back to him for considering the matter afresh, in accordance with law, after giving one more opportunity to the assessee to present her case.