M/S. VIKAS HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Assessee by Sh.Parveen Kumar, Director of the Company Revenue by Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 08.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement 16.02.2017 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 29.09.2014 of CIT(A)-19, New Delhi pertaining to 2010-11 assessment year on various grounds including Ground No.7 which reads as under:-

support of the same, Mr. Praveen Kumar, Director of the company was present. Considering the fact that the memo of appeal before the ITAT had been signed by him and he had appeared before the CIT(A) also in person, he was required to address from the impugned order how opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee. The Ld.AR addressing the factual position as set out in para 2.1 of the impugned order, submitted that initially adjournments were moved by the assessee subsequently in the month of September 2014, the assessee had filed written submissions which are available in the Paper Book filed. Thus, it was his submission that the observations in para 2.2 of the impugned order that the assessee failed to make compliance on 22.09.2014 is incorrect on facts. Accordingly, it was his prayer that an opportunity of being heard may be granted to the assessee as the impugned order was passed without hearing the assessee. The Ld.Sr.DR though had no objection to the remand of the order to the CIT(A) submitted that the assessee as per record has not participated before the CIT(A) fairly.

I.T.A .No.-6652/Del/2014 Vikas Holdings Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO

Page 2 of 2 3. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is seen that the assessee returned NIL income and in the course of the scrutiny proceedings, additions were made by the AO to the said return for the reasons set out in the assessment order. These additions were challenged in appeal before the CIT(A) where the assessee initially sought adjournment and thereafter on the last date i.e. 22.09.2014 failed to make any compliance leading to passing of the impugned order wherein the additions made by the AO were sustained. Accepting the oral undertaking of the AR the impugned order in the interests of justice is set aside and the issues are restored back to the file of the CIT(A). It is hoped that the opportunity so provided in good faith is used by participating fully and fairly before the CIT(A) and is not abused. In the eventuality of abuse of the trust reposed, it is made clear that the CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass a speaking order on the basis of material available on record. Accordingly, in terms of the above, the issue is restored back to the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.