Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC-II, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV
Date of hearing : 15.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2016 O R D E R This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of CIT(Appeals)-13, New Delhi dated 11.09.2015 inter alia on the following grounds:-
“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) and Assessing Officer are not justified in passing ex party order without giving the proper opportunity to assessee for presenting the facts of the case. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in conforming the estimation of business income of the assessee at Rs. 3000000/- as against the business income of Rs. 511489/- declared by the assessee. Action of the Ld. CIT(A) of dismissing the appeal on this ground without properly appreciating the facts of the case and without giving the assessee proper opportunity is highly unjustified and uncalled for.
3. That on facts and circumstances Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in disallowing the deduction under Chapter VIA of Rs. 94346/-. Deduction has been claimed u/s 80C and 80D of the Act on the basis of investment made by the assessee in eligible schemes and is fully allowable. Disallowance of Rs. 94346/- made is highly unjustified, bad in law and uncalled for.
4. Assessee craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of the hearing.”
During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to the fact that the Assessing Officer has framed the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act, against which an appeal was filed before the CIT(Appeals), but no notice of hearing was received by the assessee and the CIT(Appeals) has disposed of the appeal ex parte against the assessee without dealing with the issues on merit. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the CIT(Appeals) is required to adjudicate the issues on merit, even if none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, as he has also framed the assessment ex parte.
The ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of CIT(Appeals).
Having carefully examined the orders of lower authorities in the light of rival submissions and on perusal of the record, I find that undisputedly the AO has completed the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) has also disposed of the appeal ex parte without serving a notice of hearing upon the assessee. In his entire order, the CIT(Appeals) has not given any specific finding with regard to service of notice of hearing upon the assessee. Therefore, it appears that the CIT(Appeals) has disposed of the appeal without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, whereas he is required to dispose of the appeal on merits, even if none appeared on behalf of the assessee. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the matter be sent back to the CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate the all the issues on merit, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I order accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on this 21st day of September 2016.