Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ C’ SMC BENCH : CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY
आदेश / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-13,Chennai in appeal No.11/CIT(A)/2013-14 dated 22.01.2018 for the assessment year 2013-14.
ITA No.1032/Chny./2018 :- 2 -:
Mr.N.Vijay Kumar represented on behalf of the Assessee, and Mr.B.Sagadevan represented on behalf of the Revenue.
It was submitted by ld.A.R that admittedly at the time of hearing before the Ld.CIT(A), numbers of opportunities for hearing had been granted to the assessee, however on account of certain pre-occupation of the Authorised Representative of assessee, the assessee was not adequately represented. It was a prayer that assessee may be granted an opportunity to represent this appeal before the Ld.CIT(A).
In reply, the ld.D.R vehemently supported the order of Ld.CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. We have also perused the order of the CIT(Appeals) and at page-3 of the CIT(A)’s order, the Ld.CIT(A) has extracted the various dates of hearing. It is also noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has adjudicated the issues on merits.
However, as the assessee has explained the reasons for non-appearance of Authorized Representative of assessee on the due dates of hearing before the Ld.CIT(A), taking a lenient view, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for re-adjudication
ITA No.1032/Chny./2018 :- 3 -: after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 27th August, 2018, at Chennai.