M/S. PRUDENTIAL VINIMOY PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 3(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Kolkata dated 24.01.2017 for AY 2012-13.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte and non-speaking order without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He also submitted vide affidavit that due to illness of father of assessee’s Chartered Accountant he failed to appear before the ITO and the assessment order was passed ex parte u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). He also submitted that before the Ld. CIT(A) assessee’s representative had appeared on 23.01.2017 but the Ld. CIT(A) refused to note his presence since power was not available in file and when on the next day he went with the power Ld. CIT(A) informed him that he has already dismissed the case. Hence, he urged before the Bench to set aside the ex parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication.

After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the order of Ld. CIT (A) we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte and non-speaking order. We also note that the AO also passed the assessment order u/s. 144 of the Act. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that there is no discussion about the merits of the case. However, since the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex parte without any discussion about the merits of the case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and restore the appeal to his file for fresh adjudication on merits by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Needless to say, the assessee should be given reasonable opportunity of being heard.

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.