HASMUKH DOULATRAM AMESAR,RAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-4(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.16,763 on the count of commission income as reflected in Form 26AS, is unjustified and is liable to be deleted.

The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing."

When this appeal is taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order.

The learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assesse, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).

I have heard the learned Departmental Representative, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/01/2025