SRI NILANJAN MUKKHERJEE,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, BHUBANESWAR

For that, the order of the forum below is arbitrary, illegal, unjustified and erroneous and has been passed on improper application of mind, being devoid of merit as such deserves to be quashed in limine. 2 For that, the addition of Rs 70,839/- to the total income towards unexplained cash credit deserves to be deleted being unwarranted, unjustified & unsustainable in view of the facts of the case.

For that, the disallowance of expenditure added to the income towards unexplained expenditure amounting to Rs. 6,15,019/- deserves to be allowed on the ground that, the expenditure is expended exclusively for the business having intrinsic and inseggregable nexus with the work undertaken being solely for the business has to be allowed

For that, the appellant craves leave to add/alter/amend further grounds, if any, at the time of hearing of appeal.

At the outset, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte, for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. According to him, the order

Ld D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A).

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the order of the CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) in his order has observed that there was no compliance by the assessee although various opportunities were given to the assessee to appear before him on 27.4.2017, 7.8.2017 & 23.8.2017 and hence, he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)Ltd., 38 ITD 320 and other judicial pronouncements. We find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. The order of the learned CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, the same is set aside and the matter is restored back to his file with the direction to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Since we have remitted the matter to the file of the CIT (A) for deciding afresh, other grounds raised in the appeal on merits of the case are infructuous.

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