BHAGYALAXMI MANSION PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee could not receive the notice of hearing because of change in communication address and hence, the assessee could not plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee company previously registered his address to the ld. CIT as follows:

The assessee has submitted the proof of the new address before the Bench. We note that ld. CIT(A) sent notices on old address and the same were returned undelivered because of change in communication address of the assessee. Therefore, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). Hence, considering the principle of natural justice and fair play, we remit the case back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, we allow this appeal for statistical purposes.

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